K-v 


k 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 


GIFT  OF 

Kenneth  Macgowan 


SCHEME    &>    ESTIMATES 


FOR    A 


NATIONAL    THEATRE 


Afc  have  in  England  everything  to  make  us  dissatisfied  with  the  chaotic  and 
ineffective  condition  into  which  our  theatre  has  fallen.  We  have  the  remem- 
brance of  better  things  in  the  past,  and  the  elements  for  better  things  in  the 
future.  We  have  a  splendid  national  drama  of  the  Elizabethan  age,  and  a  later 
drama  which  has  no  lack  of  pieces  conspicuous  by  their  stage  qualities,  their 
vivacity  and  their  talent,  and  interesting  by  their  pictures  of  manners.  We 
have  had  great  actors.  We  have  good  actors  not  a  few  at  the  present  7/toment, 
But  we  have  been  unlucky,  as  we  so  often  are,  in  the  work  of  organisation.  .  .  . 
//  seems  to  me  that  every  one  of  us  is  concerned  to  find  a  remedy  for  this  melan- 
choly state  of  things,  and  that  the  pleasure  we  have  had  in  the  visit  of  the  French 
company  [the  Comidie  Franfaisel  is  barren,  unless  it  leaves  us  with  the  impulse 
to  do  so,  and  with  the  lesson  how  alone  it  can  be  rationally  done.  "Forget" — 
can  we  not  hear  these  fine  artists  saying  in  an  undertone  to  us,  amidst  their 
graceful  compliments  of  adieu  ? — "forget  your  clap-trap,  and  believe  that  tlu 
State,  the  nation  in  its  collective  and  corporate  character,  does  well  to  concern 
itself  about  an  influeiue  so  important  to  national  life  and  manners  as  the  theatre. 
.  .  .  The  people  will  have  the  theatre  ;  then  make  it  a  good  one.  .  .  .  The  theatre 
is  irresistible  ;  organise  the  theatre  1 " 

MATTHEW  ARNOLD. 


SCHEME  &  ESTIMATES 

FOR  A 

NATIONAL    THEATRE 


By 
WILLIAM    ARCHER 

and 

GRANVILLE  BARKER 


New  York 
DUFFIELD  &  COMPANY 

1908 


Copyright,  1908,  by 
DUFFIELD  &  COMPANY 


THE  PREMIER  PRESS 
NEW  YORK 


HAVING  READ  AND  CAREFULLY 
CONSIDERED  THIS  SCHEME  FOR  A 
NATIONAL  THEATRE,  WE  DESIRE  TO 
EXPRESS  OUR  BELIEF  THAT  SUCH  AN 
INSTITUTION  IS  URGENTLY  NEEDED, 
AND  THAT  IT  COULD  IN  ALL  PROBA- 
BILITY BE  SUCCESSFULLY  ESTAB- 
LISHED  ON  THE  GENERAL  LINES 
HERE    INDICATED. 

HENRY  IRVING. 

SQUIRE  BANCROFT. 

J.  M.  BARRIE. 

HELEN  nOYLY  CARTE, 

JOHN  HARE. 

HENRY  ARTHUR  JONES. 

A.  W.  PINERO. 


572350 


NOTE 

This  book  was  compiled  and  privately  printed  in  the 
year  1904.  We  need  not  enter  into  our  reasons  for  not 
publishing  it  at  that  date :  it  is  suflScient  that  they 
have  now  ceased  to  operate. 

In  drawing  up  the  following  Estimates  we  had  the 
assistance  of  many  expert  advisers.  Most  of  those  leaders 
of  the  theatrical  profession  who  signed  the  declaration 
on  the  previous  page,  not  only  read  the  book  in  proof, 
but  favoured  us  with  many  criticisms  and  suggestions 
which  are  embodied  in  the  text  as  it  now  stands. 
Among  our  other  advisers,  those  to  whom  we  owe  special 
acknowledgments  are :  Mr.  Robert  Courtneidge,  Miss 
Edith  Craig,  Mr.  Walter  Hann,  Mr.  Ian  Robertson, 
and  Mr.  Horace  Watson.  We  are  deeply  indebted  to 
them  for  information  placed  at  our  disposal ;  but  they 
are  of  course  in  no  way  responsible  for  the  deduction^ 
we  have  drawn  from  it,  or  for  the  general  scheme  into 
which  it  has  been  woven. 

It  is  a  source  of  pleasure  and  pride  to  us  that  the 
list  of  those  who  gave  their  sanction  to  our  scheme  should 
be  headed  by  the  name  of  Sir  Henry  Irving. 

W.  A. 
H.  G.  B. 

August,   1907. 


PREFACE  FOR  AMERICA 


When  Mr.  Granville  Barker  and  I  determined  to  publish  this  book, 
which  had  been  printed  for  private  circulation  three  years  ago,  we 
thought  for  a  moment  of  preparing  an  American  edition  of  it,  wherein 
our  financial  estimates  should  be  stated  in  dollars  instead  of  in  pounds. 
But  we  very  soon  abandoned  the  idea.  WTiy  translate  into  American 
currency  fig-ures  which  do  not  pretend  to  apply  to  American  condi- 
tions ?  We  might,  indeed,  have  called  American  experts  into  council, 
and  tried  to  adjust  our  estimates  to  the  American  scale.  But  even  if 
we  had  had  time  to  face  such  a  task,  it  would  scarcely  have  been  worth 
while;  for  it  would  have  required  far  more  than  a  mere  correction  of 
figures  to  fit  our  scheme  with  any  precision  to  American  needs  and 
opportunities.  We  determined,  then,  to  leave  the  book  a  purely  Eng- 
lish document,  trusting  that  American  readers  would  make  for  them- 
selves the  necfissary  adaptations,  and  appropriate  to  their  own  case 
as  many  of  our  suggestions  as  they  "  had  any  use  for." 

Nevertheless,  it  may  not  be  out  of  place  for  me  to  indicate  briefly 
those  parts  of  the  book  which  I  would,  so  to  speak,  underline  for 
America.  I  do  so  without  any  special  reference  to  the  schemes  and 
enterprises  in  the  direction  of  theatrical  progress  that  are  already  afoot 
in  the  United  States.  Looking  at  the  problem  in  its  widest  aspect,  I 
try  to  point  out  those  features  of  our  Scheme  which  are,  in  my  judg- 
ment, worthy  of  consideration  by  all  who  are  interested  in  the  estab- 
lishment of  an  artistic  theatre  in  any  Anglo-Saxon  community. 

The  American  reader  may  possibly  find  a  stumbling-block  at  the 

outset  in  the  name  "  National  Theatre."    It  has  really  no  importance. 

The  British  nation  is  geographically  so  much  more  concentrated  than 

the  American  nation  that  siich  a  theatre  as  is  here  in  view  might  fairly 

be  called  "  national "  in  a  sense  in  which  the  term  could  scarcely  be 

applied  to  any  American  theatre.     If  the  institution  outlined  were 

established  in  London,  its  claim  to  rank  as  "  national "  would  not 

i 


ii  PREFACE  FOR  AMERICA 

be  contested  by  Manchester,  Leeds,  or  even  Edinburgh;  whereas  New 
York  would  scarcely  concede  "  national "  pre-eminence  to  a  theatre 
established  in  Washington,  nor  Chicago  to  a  theatre  established  in 
New  York.  In  America,  perhaps,  "  City  Theatre  "  might  not  inaptly 
designate  the  type  of  playhouse  indicated.  In  this  term  I  do  not 
mean  necessarily  to  imply  a  "  Municipal  Theatre  "  in  the  Continental 
sense;  that  is,  a  theatre  owned  and  directly  or  indirectly  controlled 
by  the  Municipality.  What  I  mean  is  simply  a  theatre  commensurate 
to  the  artistic  needs  of  a  great  city.  There  are  at  least  half-a-dozen — 
perhaps  a  dozen — cities  in  the  United  States  quite  capable  of  support- 
ing a  theatre  on  the  scale  of  that  which  is  here  outlined.  The  name 
matters  nothing.  Found  the  institution,  and  a  fitting  name  will  very 
soon  present  itself.* 

Turning  now  to  Section  I  of  our  Scheme,  I  believe  that  the  prin- 
ciple stated  in  the  first  two  paragraphs  will  be  found  approximately 
right,  no  less  in  America  than  in  England.  A  City  Theatre  ought  to 
have  a  thoroughly  dignified  and  adequate  building  assigned  to  it,  free 
of  rent  and  taxes;  but,  after  the  first  few  years  of  its  working,  it 
ought  not,  if  efficiently  managed,  to  require  any  further  subsidy. 

It  seems  to  us  very  essential  that  (as  laid  down  in  Sections  I 
and  II)  the  Theatre  should  be  a  public  institution,  owned,  and,  in  the 
last  resort,  controlled,  by  Trustees  or  Governors  representing  the  com- 
munity. There  is  no  harm — there  may  be  very  great  good — in  theatres 
owned  and  controlled  by  private  art-lovers  for  the  satisfaction  of  their 
owm  tastes.  But  these  are  not  such  theatres  as  we  have  here  in  view. 
We  suggest  that  in  every  great  community  there  should  be  at  least  one 
theatre  standing  on  the  same  basis  as  the  Public  Library,  the  Museum, 
or  the  Art  Gallery,  among  the  culture-institutions  of  the  city  or  State. 
There  are,  of  course,  many  ways  in  which  such  a  theatre  might  be 
formally  attached  to  the  body  politic,  without  coming  too  immediately 
under  the  control  of  the  party  politician.  I  believe  that  numerous 
institutions  already  exist  in  the  L^nited  States,  dedicated  by  private 
donors  to  public  uses,  under  conditions  that  might  be  applied  with 
very  little  change  to  the  governance  of  a  City  Theatre.     Unless  I  am 


•The  term  "State  Theatre"  has  in  Europe  come  to  mean  a  theatre  supported  by  the 
central  government;  and  it  can  hardly  be  divested  of  that  sense.  Otherwise,  it  would 
be  an  excellent  name  for  a  theatre,  not  supported  by.  but  dedicated  to.  the  State  of 
New  York,  or  Massachusetts,  or  Pennsylvania,  or  Illinois,  or  California,  as  the  case 
might  be. 


PREFACE  FOR  AMERICA  Hi 

greatly  mistaken,  the  Carnegie  Institute  at  Pittsburg  is  a  case  in 
point.  For  the  sake  of  clearness,  however,  I  will  ventiire  to  suggest 
in  detail  (on  the  lines  laid  do^v•n  in  our  Section  II)  what  would  seem 
to  me  a  possible  Board  of  Trustees  for  a  City  Theatre  to  be  established 
in  New  York. 

Let  us  assume  that  the  number — fifteen — proposed  in  that  Section 
is  adliered  to.     In  that  case  one  nomination  apiece  might  be  allotted  to 

The  Governor  of  IsTew  York  State, 

Columbia  University, 

Cornell  University, 

Vassar  College,* 
and  two  nominations  to  the  Mayor  of  Xew  York.  "  The  remaining 
nine  members"  (I  quote  from  Section  II)  "should,  in  the  first 
instance,  be  appointed  by  the  Donor  or  Donors  of  the  site  and  building, 
and  as  vacancies  occurred  (by  death  or  resignation)  among  the  Trus- 
tees thus  appointed,  the  vacancies  should  be  filled  up  alternately  by 
co-optation  (all  Members  of  the  Board  having  power  to  vote)  and 
by  nomination  by  " — the  President  of  the  United  States.  Need  I  say 
that  I  claim  no  special  virtue  for  this  particular  method  of  constituting 
the  Board  ?  It  may  be  capable  of  improvement  in  a  score  of  ways. 
Perhaps  a  larger  Board  would  be  preferable — or,  it  may  be,  a  smaller. 
Perhaps  certain  prominent  functionaries,  such  as  the  President  of 
Columbia  University  and  the  Director  of  the  Metropolitan  Museum 
of  Art,  ought  to  be  ex-ofiicio  members  of  the  Board.  On  such  details 
it  would  be  absurd  for  me  to  do  more  than  throw  out  tentative  sugges- 
tions. The  point  to  be  emphasized  is  merely  that  some  such  Board 
could  easily  be  constituted,  not  only  in  New  York,  but  in  any  great 
American  city,  and  that  it  would  be  at  least  as  likely  to  work  satisfac- 
torily in  the  United  States  as  in  England. 

All  that  is  said  in  Section  II  of  the  duties  of  Trustees  or  Governors, 
and  their  relation  to  the  Executive  Staff  of  the  Theatre,  applies  with 
equal  force  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic. 

IMaking  a  leap  now  to  Section  XII,  I  suggest  that  the  plan  here 
set  forth  for  the  constitution  and  administration  of  the  Guarantee 

•Perhaps  Tale  fniversitj'.  being  definitely  within  the  New  York  "sphere  of  influ- 
ence." should  have  one  nomination.  On  the  other  hand,  Princeton.  I  take  it,  would 
rather  come,  with  Bryn  Mawr  and  the  University  of  Pennsylvania,  within  the  circum- 
scription of  Philadelphia;  just  as  Harvard  and  Wellesley  would  naturally  nominate 
trustees  for  a  Boston  theatre. 


iv  PREFACE  FOR  AMERICA 

Fund,  for  automatically  determining,  as  it  were,  the  success  or  failure 
of  the  enterprise,  and  for  its  liquidation  in  the  event  of  failure,  is 
worthy  of  careful  attention  in  the  United  States.  There  is  this  differ- 
ence between  the  Theatre  we  are  considering  and  such  an  establish- 
ment as  the  Carnegie  Institute,  that,  whereas,  the  talents  required  for 
successfully  conducting  the  latter  are  definitely  understood  and  exist 
in  abundance,  those  required  for  successfully  conducting  the  former 
are  not  yet  clearly  understood,  are  certainly  rare,  and  may  not  always 
be  available.  There  is  as  yet  no  recognized  tradition  in  English- 
speaking  countries  for  the  organization  and  management  of  National 
or  City  Theatres.  Until  such  a  tradition  establishes  itself,  each  indi- 
vidual theatre  must  be  an  experimental  effort.  In  most  cases,  no 
doubt,  the  enterprise  would  have  sufficient  vitality  to  profit  by  experi- 
ence, however  dearly  bought,  and  to  proceed  through  temporary  failure 
to  enduring  success.  But  it  might  conceivably  prove,  in  this  or  that 
individual  instance,  that  the  Theatre  was  hopelessly  at  odds  with  its 
environment,  that  no  mere  reorganization  could  meet  the  trouble,  and 
that  the  only  reasonable  coiirse  was  to  abandon  the  experiment.  In 
view  of  this  possibility,  it  is  cleai'ly  expedient  that  the  Donor  or  Donors 
should  retain  some  hold  upon  their  benefaction,  until  it  has  absolutely 
proved  itself  to  be  a  benefaction  indeed.  Their  hold  upon  the  enter- 
prise should  on  no  account  consist  of  any  personal  share  in  the  manage- 
ment. A  Donor  might  of  course  be  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Trustees ; 
but  even  this  would  probably  be  undesirable.  For  him  to  claim,  simply 
as  Donor,  any  control  over  the  enterprise,  after  the  statutes  or  condi- 
tions of  his  gift  had  been  determined,  would  be  disastrous.  But  these 
statutes  or  conditions  should  certainly  foresee  the  possibility  of  fail- 
ure, and  should  define  the  claim  of  the  Donor  or  Donors  upon  the  site 
and  building  in  the  event  of  that  possibility  occurring.  I  think,  then, 
that  the  method  of  procedure  outlined  in  Section  XII  and  in  Appendix 
A  is  at  any  rate  worthy  of  consideration,  wherever  such  an  enterprise 
is  being  set  on  foot. 

The  Repertory  set  forth  in  Section  IV  is  naturally  not  in  the  least 
like  that  which  we  should  have  sketched  had  we  had  an  American 
theatre  in  view.  Indeed  it  is  not  the  Repertory  which  we  should  now 
forecast,  even  for  an  English  theatre.  Things  have  moved  rapidly 
since  1904,  and  several  of  the  authors  mentioned  on  p.  44,  whom  we 
then  regarded  as  too  "  disputable "  for  inclusion  in  our  somewhat 


PREFACE  FOR  AMERICA  v 

pusillanimous  list,  have  now  passed  quite  beyond  the  disputable  stage, 
and  may  fairly  claim  right  of  entrance  to  any  self-respecting  theatre. 
America,  too,  has  for  long  been,  though  in  a  capricious  way,  more 
hospitable  to  "  advanced  "  drama  than  England.  For  this  as  well  as 
for  other  reasons,  the  Repertory  would  have  to  be  wholly  reconstituted 
before  it  could  be  regarded  as  in  any  way  suitable  to  American  con- 
ditions. 

The  tendency  to  be  guarded  against  in  America — if  I  may  venture 
to  say  so — is  a  too  great  hospitality  towards  foreign  works,and  a  lack 
of  reasonable  discrimination  in  favor  of  native  authors.  This  tendency 
seems  to  be  gradually  correcting  itself ;  but  it  is  still  sufficiently  strong 
to  induce  me  to  draw  special  attention  to  Regulations  10,  11  and  12 
on  p,  1 33,  with  the  remark  that  some  regulations  to  a  like  effect  ought 
to  be  laid  down  for  the  conduct  of  every  American  theatre  of  the  type 
we  are  discussing.  They  would  require,  however,  to  be  very  consider- 
ably modified.  For  one  thing,  I  would  not  suggest  reciprocity  in  the 
matter  dealt  with  in  Regulation  12.  We,  in  England,  can  afford  to 
make  no  discrimination  against  modern  American  plays;  T  do  not 
think  that  you,  in  America,  can  as  yet  afford  to  return  the  compliment. 
Perhaps  a  judicious  regulation  might  be  that  not  less  than  one-third 
of  the  performances  of  any  season  should  be  devoted  to  plays  by  modern 
American  authors,  and  not  more  than  one-third  to  plays  by  modern 
English  authors.  On  the  other  hand.  Regulation  11  might  be  allowed 
to  stand,  with  the  proviso  that  English  plays  over  one  hundred  years 
old  should  not  be  regarded  as  foreign,  but  as  belonging  to  the  common 
literature  of  the  two  peoples. 

It  would,  of  course,  be  quite  inappropriate  to  open  an  American 
theatre  with  Shakespeare's  four  great  histories.  Every  effort  should 
be  made,  it  seems  to  me,  to  secure  a  drama  of  American  history  ade- 
quate to  the  occasion ;  but  if  no  good  play  of  the  type  were  forthcoming 
(as  is  quite  possible,  for  inspiration  seldom  arrives  to  order)  the  obvi- 
ous course  would  be  to  fall  back  upon  Hamlet,  or  Julius  Caesar,  or  A 
Winter's  Tale,  and  let  Shakespeare  the  world-genius,  as  distinct  from 
Shakespeare  the  Briton,  consecrate  the  new  Temple  of  Art. 

But  if  the  individual  plays  selected  for  our  specimen  Repertory 
have  no  special  meaning  for  America,  the  system  of  alternation  laid 
down  in  our  Regulations  8  and  9  (p.  133)  and  exemplified  in  the 
order  of  the  Repertory  (pp.  49-60)   is  one  to  which  I  beg  to  direct 


vi  PREFACE  FOR  AMERICA 

special  attention.  This  system  (in  effect,  though  of  course  not  in 
detail)  obtains  in  all  the  Kepertory  Theatres  of  the  Continent,  and  is, 
indeed,  essential  to  the  very  idea  of  a  Repertory  Theatre.  It  is  of  the 
utmost  importance  to  realize  that  the  type  of  theatre  here  outlined  has 
nothing  in  common  with  the  Stock  Company  Theatres,  so  frequent  in 
America,  at  which  a  different  jjlay  is  presented  each  week.  The  artis- 
tic disadvantages  of  this  system  are  certainly  as  great  as  those  of  the 
long  run  system,  and  probably  greater.  It  is  manifestly  inapplicable, 
indeed,  in  a  theatre  which  regards  the  production  of  new  plays  as  a 
main  part  of  its  functions ;  for  what  author  would  consent  to  have  his 
play  produced  for  a  single  week,  and  then  indefinitely  shelved?  Al- 
most equally  unsatisfactory  is  the  "  short  run  "  system,  under  which 
a  play  is  produced  for  a  month  or  six  weeks,  and  then  taken  off,  with 
or  without  the  prospect  of  revival  during  the  following  season.  If 
the  play  is  a  failure,  a  four  weeks'  run  is  far  too  long;  if  it  is  a 
success,  a  six  weeks'  run  is  far  too  short;  and  it  is  quite  doubtful 
whether  it  will  recapture  on  revival  its  original  popularity.  The  only 
practical  system  at  a  theatre  such  as  we  are  here  considering  is  the 
system  of  alternation,  under  which  a  play  may,  if  the  public  wants 
to  see  it,  be  acted  a  hundred  times  in  a  season,  but  must  not  be  acted 
more  than  (say)  four  times  in  a  week.  From  this  point  of  view,  then, 
we  think  that  the  ordering  of  our  Eepertory,  and  the  regulations  con- 
cerning it,  are  worthy  of  serious  attention. 

The  discussion  in  Section  VIII  of  the  proper  seating  capacity  for 
such  a  theatre  ought  to  have  no  less  validity  for  America  than  for 
England.  The  gi'cat  size  of  most  American  theatres,  outside  New 
York,  is,  from  the  artistic  point  of  view,  a  serious  evil.  We  hope  that 
our  suggestions  as  to  the  Fee  System  in  the  remuneration  of  actors 
and  actresses,  as  to  the  Pension  Fund,  and  as  to  the  Subscription  Sys- 
tem, may  be  found  more  or  less  useful.  Amid  all  differences  of  detail, 
the  problems  to  be  solved  in  America  are  the  same  as  those  which  we 
have  attempted  to  solve  for  England ;  and  we  may  fairly  hope  that  our 
work  will  not  prove  quite  valueless  to  anyone  who  is  applying  his  mind 
to  that  most  important  and  pressing  problem :  the  reasonable  organiza- 
tion of  dramatic  art  in  the  English-speaking  countries. 

WILLIAM    ARCHER. 


PREFACE 

IN  THE  FORM  OF  A  LETTER  FROM  ONE  AUTHOR 

to  the  other 

My  dear  Archer, 

You  want  a  preface  from  me — do  you  ? — to  say  how- 
far  the  three  years'  experience  of  theatre  management  through 
which  I  have  passed,  since  this  unofficial  blue-book  was 
written  and  printed,  has  altered,  as  far  as  I  am  concerned,  the 
views  expressed  in  it.  It  hasn't  reaUy  altered  them  at  all. 
The  need  for  a  repertory  theatre  remains  the  same :  no  less, 
and  it  could  not  well  be  greater.  But  I  cannot  help  think- 
ing that  the  public  mind,  and  especially  the  mind  of  the 
theatrical  public,  has  developed  a  little,  and  that  therefore 
the  possibilities  of  the  project  are  somewhat  differently 
balanced  from  what  they  were  when  we  wrote.  Moreover, 
while  experience  has  not  altered  my  views,  it  has  diversified 
them ;  so  that  there  are  one  or  two  amendments  to  our  scheme 
which  I  would  like  to  suggest.  If  you  do  not  agree  with 
them,  write  another  preface  stUl  to  say  so.  It  would  only 
bring  the  number  up  to  four. 

I  could  chip  here  and  there  at  our  piles  of  figures,  but 
any  one  is  welcome  to  do  that.  Except  in  one  or  two  in- 
stances, their  increase  or  decrease  will  ultimately  depend 
upon  the  personality  of  the  theatre's  administration. 

I  am  inclined  to  think,  though,  that  our  estimate  for 
actors'  salaries  may  have  been  invalidated  since  we  made  it 


viii  PREFACE 

by  the  increasing  effect  of  what  is  called  the  American 
Invasion.  The  methods  of  syndicate  and  trust  have,  you 
know,  brought  about  a  breakback  competition  for  the  limited 
amount  of  assured  talent  which  London  possesses,  of  which 
the  actors  included  in  that  limitation  have  not  been  slow  to 
take  advantage.  Small  blame  to  them !  At  least  I  can 
account  in  no  other  way  for  the  great  forcing-up  of  salaries 
that  has  been  going  on  for  some  years  now.  The  more  a 
manager  speculates,  the  more  his  resources  of  capital  enable 
him  to  juggle  with  the  fate  of  companies  and  plays,  the 
more  is  the  actor  forced  into  speculation,  gambling  as  he 
does  only  with  his  own  personality,  now  more  in  demand, 
now  less,  and  with  so  little  assurance  of  stability.  It  will 
need  the  establishment,  not  of  one  permanent  repertory 
theatre,  but  of  many,  and  the  operation  of  several  years, 
to  steady  and  correct  this  debauched  market.  Meanwhile 
the  imaginary  promoters  of  such  a  scheme  as  ours  should  be 
made  to  face  present  conditions.  If  any  one  supposes  that 
these  conditions  are  even  to  the  material  advantage  of  the 
actor  who  may  seem  to  be  making  hay  while  the  sun  of 
speculation  shines,  let  us  refer  such  an  apostle  of  the  Happy- 
go-lucky  to  our  argument  upon  the  point  in  Section  III. 
The  difference  to  prepare  for  would  be  found  more  in  the 
salaries  of  actresses  than  of  actors ;  and  not  at  the  head  or 
tail  of  our  list,  but  in  the  middle,  where  the  artistic  safety 
of  such  a  company  as  this  would  especially  lie,  where  absolute 
competence  could  least  afford  to  be  jeopardised. 

I  think  we  should  have  allowed  a  definite  margin  to 
cover  the  cost  of  artistic  experiment,  which  should  certainly 
be  demanded  of  such  a  theatre.  I  don't  refer  so  much  to 
the    production    of    experimental    plays    as    to    experimental 


PREFACE  ix 

methods  of  production.  Certainly  the  artist  designer  is  not 
called  to  the  service  of  the  theatre  in  England  nearly  as 
much  as  he  should  be ;  his  co-operation  in  the  leading  Berlin 
theatres  has  had  at  least  the  most  interesting  results.  Even 
when  we  use  him,  we  are  hardly  ever  content  to  give  him 
a  free  hand.  He  is  not  necessarily  an  expensive  luxury. 
Indeed  my  special  plea  for  him  is  that  at  his  best  he  substi- 
tutes a  simple  beauty  of  effect  for  the  aggressive  detail  which 
serves,  in  scenic  decoration  as  in  anything,  only  to  cover  up 
poverty  of  imagination.  But  he  has  been  kept  so  long  out 
of  this  inheritance  that  time  and  patience  are  wanted  before 
he  can  work  freely  and  at  his  ease  in  it ;  and  in  the  Theatre 
time  and  patience  mean  money. 

Before  the  item  "  Ladies'  Modern  Dresses "  I  pause  in 
some  doubt.  I  think  our  estimates  are  sufficient.  They 
ought  to  be  sufficient.  But  then  I  am  deeply  conscious  of 
the  shortcomings  of  my  judgment  in  this  matter.  I  always 
feel  that  I  like  to  be  as  unconscious  of  the  cut  and  colour 
of  clothes  upon  the  stage  as  I  am  in  the  living-room  of  a 
house.  I  am  told  by  persons  of  great  authority  that,  while 
this  is  quite  the  right  feeling  to  have,  such  a  result  is  only 
obtainable  by  high-priced  skill,  care,  and  material.  When  I 
dispute  such  a  necessity  I  am  assured  that,  while  my  feelings 
still  do  me  credit,  my  powers  of  observation  are  simply  em- 
bryonic. I  certainly  recall  a  most  unhappy  afternoon  at  the 
Court  Theatre,  when  a  certain  actress,  Bernard  Shaw,  and  I 
passed  in  review  a  perfect  kaleidoscope  of  scenery  and  clothes. 
Did  blue  go  well  against  grey  in  an  amber  light,  or  was 
purple  better  upon  orange  when  the  lights  were  blue  ?  Shaw 
protested  to  the  bitter  end  that  he  had  an  opinion  of  his 
own ;   but   after   two    or    three    hours   of  this  torture    I   was 


X  PREFACE 

ready  to  confess  that  I  neither  knew  green  from  pink  nor 
cared.  I  cannot  recast  that  estimate.  As  I  say,  it  may  be 
a  perfectly  sane  and  sound  one.  I  sometimes  think  that  the 
only  reliable  figures  about  ladies'  modern  dresses  are  contained 
in  the  bills  for  them.  Certainly  that  department  would  have 
to  be  under  the  control  of  an  expert,  who  could  decide  as 
quickly  and  authoritatively  upon  the  colours  of  a  dress  and  a 
scene,  as  can  a  competent  stage-manager  upon  the  construction 
of  a  piece  of  business.  And  why  should  not  a  chief  of  ward- 
robe be  found  (what  a  figure  of  imposing  mien  the  title 
suggests!)  who  could  also  keep  his  expenditure  within  what 
a  mere  man  may  consider  the  bounds  of  reason  ?  Still,  when 
I  picture  him  informing  the  leading  lady  of  a  four-perform- 
ance revival  of  The  Importance  of  being  Earnest  that  her 
last  year's  frock  would  do  perfectly  well,  and  when  I  hear 
in  imagination  that  leading  lady's  reply,  I  am  glad  that 
his    post — even    with    that    stirring    title    to    it — wiU    never 

be  mine. 

From  one  thing  this  three  years'  interval  between  writing 
and  publication  has  absolved  us :  the  extreme  self-denial  with 
which  we  composed  that  list  of  plays  to  be  performed  during 
the  opening  season.  Certainly  in  those  far-off"  days  you,  as 
Ibsen's  sponsor,  were  under  more  than  suspicion  as  a  dan- 
gerous theatrical  revolutionary.  I  was  known  to  those  who 
knew  me  at  all  as  being  associated  with  the  shadiest  in- 
terests. I  believed  that  Shakespeare  should  be  played  with- 
out scenery,  and  I  was  hand  in  glove  with  a  crew  of 
impossibilists  called  the  Stage  Society.  Perhaps  we  were 
wise,  then,  to  demand  at  first  only  a  new  and  healthy  system 
of  existence  for  our  theatre,  to  prove  that  it  could  be 
brought  into  being  under  a  management  which  need  have  no 


PREFACE  xi 

distressing  gospel  to  preach,  which  need  not  even  possess 
settled  artistic  convictions.  I  hope  we  did  not  overdo  our 
disinterestedness.  I  am  sure  neither  of  us  ever  wanted  to 
see  a  spiritless  theatre,  be  its  economic  condition  never  so 
perfect.  Anyhow,  even  this  short  lapse  of  time  has  been 
enough  on  our  side — which  is,  we  think,  the  side  of  the 
angels — for  us  no  longer  to  need  to  assume  such  a  position. 
Helping  you  with  this  book  to-day,  I  should  unhesitatingly, 
both  from  motives  of  good  policy  and  personal  taste,  advocate 
the  inclusion  in  our  repertory  list  of  every  author  whom  we 
so  carefully  excluded  four  years  ago — Ibsen,  Hauptmann, 
d'Annunzio,  Shaw,  and  the  rest.  I  hope  I  could  even  find 
other  names  to  add. 

But  one  great  difference  I  would  propose  to  make,  were 
we  writing  the  book  to-day.  I  would  draw  up  a  second  set 
of  figures,  suitable  to  the  foundation  of  an  adequate  reper- 
tory theatre  in  Manchester,  Birmingham,  or  some  such  pro- 
vincial centre.  For  it  is  to  one  of  these  cities,  easier  to  stir 
to  the  expression  of  civic  opinion,  rather  than  to  monstrous  and 
inarticulate  London,  centre  of  all  English  thought  and  action 
though  it  may  claim  to  be,  that  I  look  for  the  first  practical 
step  in  theatrical  organisation.  That  there  are  local  tendencies 
towards  a  better  understanding  of  the  part  which  might  be 
played  in  English  life  by  a  vitalised  English  drama  cannot,  I 
think,  be  denied.  To  promote  this  understanding  is  the  avowed 
object  of  the  Dramatic  Revival  Society  sponsored  by  Mr.  W.  T. 
Stead  and  Mr.  F.  R.  Benson ;  and  what  other  meaning  is  to 
be  attached  to  the  welcome  formation  of  Playgoers'  Societies 
in  Manchester,  Leeds,  and  Stockport,  or  to  the  outbreak  of  a 
perfect  fever  of  Pageantry?  Actors  and  actresses  certainly 
feel  that  the  touring  system  by  which  the  provincial  Theatre 


xii  PREFACE 

is  almost  exclusively  fed  must  at  last  have  reached  the  nadir 
of  its  sweated  hopelessness ;  at  least,  if  there  is  a  lower  depth 
to  be  touched,  no  self-respecting  worker  is  anxious  to  descend 
it.  And  when  once  the  formers  of  opinion  in  these  very- 
self-respecting  communities,  in  the  ^lidlands  and  further 
north,  have  thoroughly  realised  that  the  policy  of  neglect 
adopted  towards  this  institution,  the  Theatre,  which  exists 
only  in  public  buildings  licensed  by  the  citizens  for  their 
recreation,  has  been  both  illogical  and  disastrous,  and  can  be 
brought  to  see  the  potentialities  of  an  opposite  course,  the 
change  will  not  be  very  far  off. 

For  a  repertory  theatre  in  Manchester  or  Birmingham 
the  amendments  to  our  figures  might  be  simple,  but  would 
need  to  be  drastic  enough  to  allow  for  the  difference  in  seat- 
prices  customary  there.  j^iooo  might  be  cut  from  the 
estimate  for  the  general  staff,  as  much  as  £7000  or  ;^8ooo 
from  the  salaries  of  actors  and  actresses,  and  ;^20oo  or 
£3000  might  be  docked  elsewhere.  The  labour  of  the 
theatre  could  hardly  be  cheapened,  nor  could  the  machinery, 
but  to  its  great  disadvantage.  The  price  of  any  economies 
would  be  a  reduction  in  repertory  and  the  necessity  of 
engaging  managers  and  actors  with  reputations  more  to 
make  than  already  made. 

It  would  be  very  necessary  to  guard  against  the  tempta- 
tion to  maintain  a  large  repertory  at  the  expense  of  an 
overworked  company.  Actors  of  to  -  day  are  popularly 
supposed  to  enjoy  too  much  leisure.  I  would  undertake  to 
prove  that  they  have  not  enough,  not  enough  of  the  right 
sort  any  way,  to  employ  it  profitably.  And  with  modern 
drama  to  interpret,  with  modem  standards  to  be  satisfied, 
no  return  to  the  conditions  of  the  old  stock  system  is  possible. 


PREFACE  xiii 

The  experience  of  the  past  thirty  years  condemns  them,  no 
less  than  it  condemns  itself.  The  Theatre  of  the  past  stood 
more  or  less  for  intellectual  and  social  vagabondage.  At 
present  it  is  being  patronised  and  petted,  hardly,  many  may 
think,  to  its  greater  advantage.  But  if  it  is  ever  to  become 
a  part  of  our  civic  institutions,  its  working  conditions  must 
be  organised  as  becomes  a  healthy  and  stable  civil  service. 
And  incidentally  its  servants  must  be  left  opportunities  to 
retain  that  social  citizenship  which  formerly  they  altogether 
renounced,  and  which  now  the  pressure  of  the  prevailing 
system  does  not  afford  them.  If  they  are  to  depict  social 
life  they  must  be  encouraged  to  enjoy  it,  not  considered 
and  left  to  become  mere  emotional  acrobats. 

There  are  many  reasons  why  the  first  of  the  new  reper- 
tory theatres  could  be  more  easily  started  in  a  provincial 
centre  than  in  London.  If  the  question  of  endowment  were 
a  difficulty,  there  are  existing  buildings  fit  to  be  utilised. 
At  the  worst,  (so  to  speak  of  a  positively  happy  eventuality) 
one  of  these  could  be  leased  by  a  committee  and  let  again 
to  some  manager  upon  a  cahier  des  charges.  And  even 
such  a  truncated  version  of  our  scheme  as  this  would,  I 
think,  have  a  very  fair  chance  of  success  where  otherwise, 
as  now,  only  the  stale  scraps  from  London's  not  too  whole- 
some theatre  -  table  were  sparingly  doled  out.  Playgoers 
there  might  be  more  ready  to  recognise  the  virtues  of  acting, 
vitalised  under  simpler  methods  of  production,  than  would 
the  pampered  London  public.  The  present  effect  upon 
playgoing  habits  of  the  custom  of  a  weekly  change  of  bill 
at  the  theatres,  would,  while  it  lasted,  and  until  a  better 
custom  took  hold,  tend  to  increase  the  size  of  the  average 
audience  under  a  repertory  system,   and  to  make  a  method 


xiv  PREFACE 

of  subscription  more  acceptable.  And  would  not  the  policy 
of  a  management  so  placed  be  further  from  the  reach  of 
the  influence  of  Fashion  ?  Of  all  the  vitiating  influences 
upon  the  Theatre  in  London,  has  not  this  been  the  worst, 
with  its  demand  for  sentiment,  smartness,  insincerity,  and 
shallow  thought,  and  its  lack  of  reasonable  interest  in  any 
art?  As  a  Londoner  I  regret  my  prophecy,  but  I  think  it 
will  not  be  until  shamed  into  action  by  other  cities'  good 
fortune,  that  we  shall  have  our  central  repertory  theatre. 

Here,  then,  is  my  preface,  my  dear  Archer.  I  wish  I 
could  think  that,  in  sending  it  you,  I  in  any  way  restored 
the  balance  of  our  collaboration  in  this  book.  I  remember 
well  (will  you  allow  me  to  tell  you  ?)  how  encouraged  and 
gratified  I  was,  by  your  asking  me  to  help  you  in  it. 
Whatever  there  is  in  it  of  mine,  I  dedicate  very  whole- 
heartedly to  you. — Yours, 

H.  GRANVILLE  BARKER. 

August,  1907. 


PREFACE 

(1904) 

There  has  hitherto  been  one  enormous  obstacle  to  the  estab- 
lishment of  a  National  Theatre  in  England.  However  will- 
ing a  man  or  body  of  men  might  be  to  give  a  new  impulse  to 
the  art  of  the  theatre,  and  place  England  abreast  of  France 
and  Germany  in  respect  of  theatrical  organisation,  he  or  they 
could  have  no  definite  idea  how  to  set  about  it.  A  pubhc 
park,  a  picture-gallery,  or  a  free  library  is  very  easily  created, 
and,  once  created,  it  practically  "runs  itself."  There  are  a 
hundred  recognised  models  for  its  organisation  and  manage- 
ment. But  an  Endowed  Theatre  is,  in  England,  a  wholly 
unfamiliar  piece  of  mechanism,  and  the  management  of  it  an 
unknown  art;  while  there  are  many  reasons  why  no  foreign 
institution  of  the  kind  could  be  imitated  in  detail  with  any 
hope  of  success.  There  is  no  clear-cut  channel,  as  it  were,  in 
which  liberality  and  public  spirit  can  easily  flow  in  the  direc- 
tion of  theatrical  reform.  It  is  scarcely  an  exaggeration  to  say 
that  you  can  buy  a  free  library  or  a  picture-gallery  ready- 
made,  and  present  it  as  a  "going  concern"  to  whatever 
community  you  please.  But  the  man  who  desired  to  en- 
dow a  Theatre  would  have  first  to  invent  it— a  laborious 
task,  for  which  he  would  probably  have  no  preparation  and 
no  facilities. 

In  the  foUowing  pages  we  take  this  task  oflf  his  hands.     We 


xvi  PREFACE 

present,  for  the  first  time  in  England,  a  detailed  Scheme,  with 
Estimates,  for  the  creation,  organisation,  and  management  of  a 
National  Theatre.  We  are  far  from  believing  that  our  plan  is 
perfect  in  all  its  details.  It  might  even  happen  that  every  crank 
and  lever  in  our  design  would  have  to  be  somewhat  modified 
before  the  machine  could  run  smoothly  and  satisfactorily.  But 
we  believe  that,  in  merely  outlining  the  organisation,  and  sug- 
gesting the  natural  interplay  of  its  parts,  we  have  made  an 
essential  step  in  advance.  We  have  substituted  clear  and 
definite  for  vague  and  formless  ideas. 

It  is  needless  to  discuss  at  any  length  the  abstract  desirability 
of  the  institution  we  have  outlined.  Many  of  our  readers  are 
doubtless  already  convinced  on  that  point ;  others  will,  we  hope, 
gradually  reaUse  the  uses  of  the  institution  as  they  study  its 
details.  We  present  in  our  Appendix  some  extracts  from  the 
very  considerable  literature  published  during  recent  years,  in 
which  the  theatrical  situation  and  the  theory  of  theatrical 
endowment  are  discussed. 

To  assert  the  urgent  need  for  an  Endowed  Theatre  is  not 
necessarily  to  adopt  a  wholly  pessimistic  view  of  the  existing 
condition  of  the  English  drama  and  stage.  On  the  contrary, 
the  present  writers  are  convinced  that  dramatic  authorship,  at 
any  rate,  has  greatly  advanced  of  recent  years,  though  there  is 
reason  to  fear  that  hostile  conditions  are  beginning  to  check  that 
advance.  We  also  admit  that  the  stage  owes  much,  in  many 
ways,  to  the  actor-manager  and  the  long  run.  Both  of  these 
institutions  have  their  merits ;  and  a  National  Theatre,  while 
excluding  them  from  its  own  economy,  would  in  no  sense  be 
hostile  to  them.  What  is  harmful  is  their  present  predominance 
over  the  whole  field  of  theatrical  enterprise.  In  the  interests 
both  of  authorship  and  of  acting,  a  fair  proportion  of  Repertory 


PREFACE  xvii 

Theatres  ought  to  co-exist  with  the  actor-managed  and  long-run 
theatres ;  and  in  order  to  set  the  repertory  system  firmly  afoot, 
a  certain  measure  of  endowment  is  necessary. 

It  follows  from  what  we  have  said  that  we  do  not  regard  the 
National  or  Central  Theatre  here  outlined  as,  in  itself,  a  sufficient 
cure  for  all  that  is  amiss  in  our  theatrical  life.  Even  if  it  stood 
alone,  it  would  do  incalculable  service  ;  but  the  most  useful  of 
all  its  functions,  perhaps,  will  be  that  of  supplying  an  incentive 
and  model  to  similar  enterprises  in  provincial  cities,  in  the 
colonies,  and  in  America.  The  acted  drama  ought  to  be,  and 
indeed  is,  one  of  the  great  bonds  of  union  between  all  the 
Anglo-Saxon  peoples  ;  but  at  present,  unfortunately,  it  may  be 
said  to  "draw  the  whole  English-speaking  world  together  in 
the  bonds  of  a  racial  vulgarity." 

In  the  provinces  and  beyond  the  seas.  Repertory  Theatres 
would  no  doubt  be  designed  on  many  different  scales,  according 
to  the  circumstances  and  resources  of  each  particular  locality. 
A  much  less  ambitious  theatre  than  that  which  is  here  outlined 
would  be  adequate  to  the  needs  of  many  provincial  towns.  We 
do  not,  however,  profess  to  give  any  estimates  for  minor  theatres. 
Our  forecasts  and  figures  refer  to  a  Central  Theatre,  to  be  situated 
in  London,  and  organised  on  such  a  scale  as  to  justify  it  in 
assuming,  without  incongruity  or  grandiloquence,  the  rank  of  a 
National  Theatre,  worthy  of  the  metropolis  of  the  Empire.  At 
the  same  time,  we  hope  and  believe  that  our  Scheme  and  Esti- 
mates will  prove  helpful  to  the  organisers  of  Repertory  Theatres 
on  whatever  scale.  It  is  easy  to  "  take  in "  a  garment  that  is 
cut  too  large  ;  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  "let  out"  one  that 
is  cut  too  small. 

An  enterprise  on  a  large  scale — short  of  extravagance  or 
ostentation — would  have  a  far  gi-eater  chance  of  succeeding  and 


xviii  PREFACE 

establishing  itself  in  a  permanent  and  honourable  position  than 
an  enterprise  on  a  small  scale,  however  ably  conducted.  It  is 
essential  to  break  away,  completely  and  unequivocally,  from 
the  ideals  and  traditions  of  the  profit-seeking  stage ;  and  it 
is  essential  that  the  new  system  should  have  sufficient  re- 
sources to  give  it  time  to  establish  itself  and  take  hold  upon 
the  public.  Moreover,  the  National  Theatre  must  be  its  oivn 
advertisement — must  impose  itself  on  public  notice,  not  by 
posters  and  column  advertisements  in  the  newspapers,  but  by 
the  very  fact  of  its  ample,  dignified,  and  liberal  existence. 
It  must  bulk  large  in  the  social  and  intellectual  life  of 
London.  There  must  be  no  possibility  of  mistaking  it  for 
one  of  those  pioneer  theatres  which  have  been  so  numerous 
of  late  years,  here  and  elsewhere,  and  have  in  their  way  done 
valuable  work.  It  must  not  even  have  the  air  of  appealing 
to  a  specially  literary  and  cultured  class.  It  must  be  visibly 
and  unmistakably  a  popular  institution,  making  a  large  appeal 
to  the  whole  community.  So  manifest  does  this  appear  to  us 
that  we  would  strongly  deprecate  any  effort  on  a  small  scale, 
until  it  shall  be  absolutely  apparent  that  no  eflfort  on  the  scale 
here  indicated  is  within  the  range  of  practical  politics.  A 
struggling  enterprise,  with  narrow  resources,  might  prove  a 
mere  stumbling-block  in  the  path  of  theatrical  progress  at 
large.  Its  failure  would  be  disastrous,  and  its  partial  success 
only  less  so. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  Theatre  we  propose  would  be  a 
National  Theatre  in  this  sense,  that  it  would  be  from  the 
first  conditionally — and,  in  the  event  of  success,  would  become 
absolutely — the  property  of  the  nation.  It  may  be  asked  why, 
in  that  case,  we  do  not  suggest  going  direct  to  the  Govern- 
ment (which  would,    of  course,   mean   to   Parliament)   for  the 


PREFACE  xix 

money  required.  The  reason  is  simply  that  we  believe  it 
would  be  waste  of  time.  It  is  not  to  be  expected  that,  at 
the  present  stage  of  affairs,  Parliament  should  vote  money  for 
the  estabUshment  of  a  theatre  in  London  or  elsewhere.  We 
must  look  to  private  liberality  to  present  a  Central  Theatre 
to  London  and  to  the  Empire.  That  is  not  only  the  most 
probable,  but,  on  the  whole,  the  most  desirable  event.  In 
the  provinces  it  is  otherwise.  There  one  would  hope  that 
municipalities  would  in  many  cases  undertake  the  urgent  duty 
of  bringing  wholesome  and  rational  theatrical  entertainments 
within  the  reach  of  the  people.  The  successful  establishment 
of  a  Central  Theatre  in  London  would  most  probably  be  fol- 
lowed by  legislation,  empowering  municipalities  to  do  what  is 
required  of  them  in  this  respect.  At  present  their  powers  are 
ill-defined  and  inadequate  ;  and  the  same  remark  applies  to 
the  powers  of  local  bodies  within  the  metropolitan  area.  A 
Central  Theatre  would  not  by  any  means  supply  all  the 
higher  theatrical  needs  even  of  London  alone.  But  it  ought 
to  lead  the  way  in  the  reform  of  our  theatrical  system  ;  and 
the  establishment  of  it  ought  to  be,  and  probably  will  be, 
effected  by  the  public  spirit  of  individual  citizens. 

Our  estimates,  it  will  be  seen,  refer  exclusively  to  dramatic, 
as  distinct  from  operatic,  performances.  We  axe  by  no  means 
hostile  to  the  idea  of  a  subsidised  Opera-House  ;  but  we  hold 
that  the  drama  claims  precedence,  inasmuch  as  England  pos- 
sesses a  national  drama,  to  be  housed  in  a  National  Theatre, 
but  does  not  as  yet  possess  a  national  opera.  Some  of  our  cal- 
culations may  possibly  be  of  use  to  the  promoters  of  an  operatic 
scheme ;  but  the  conditions  of  the  two  arts  are  so  radically 
different  that  it  is  almost  impossible  to  reason  from  one  to  the 
other.     There   is   no   doubt,   however,   that   the    success   of  a 


XX  PREFACE 

National  Theatre  would  greatly  simplify  the  task  of  those  who 
are  agitating  for  a  subsidised  Opera-House. 


We  venture  to  request  the  reader  of  the  following  pages  to 
suspend  judgment  upon  details  until  he  has  taken  a  general 
view  of  the  whole  Scheme.  Many  points  which  may  at  first 
seem  obscure  or  questionable  will,  we  hope,  become  clearer 
and  perhaps  more  convincing  as  the  project  develops.  We 
would  also  beg  him,  in  criticising  our  proposals,  to  distin- 
guish between  essential  matters — matters  of  principle — and 
merely  illustrative  details.  For  example,  in  our  list  of  a 
season's  repertory,  the  reader  will  very  likely  find  several 
plays  which  he,  personally,  does  not  greatly  long  to  see,  at  a 
National  Theatre  or  elsewhere.  If  he  holds  that  the  class  of 
play  should  not  be  admitted  to  the  Theatre,  we  wiU  give  our 
best  consideration  to  his  criticism ;  but  if  his  objection  is 
merely  to  the  individual  play,  we  suggest  that  to  urge  it 
would  be  to  waste  time.  The  repertory  includes  more 
than  one  play  for  which  we  ourselves  cherish  no  personal 
enthusiasm.  No  theatre  can  live  entirely  on  plays  which 
appeal  equally  to  every  one.  In  any  season's  repertory  of  the 
Th^atre-Frangais  or  the  Burgtheater,  the  reader  would  cer- 
tainly find  several  plays  which  to  him  seemed  tedious  or 
otherwise  objectionable.  If  the  repertory  we  have  outlined 
exactly  represented  either  our  own  personal  taste  or  the 
reader's,  the  presumption  would  be  that  it  was  badly  chosen. 
Helpful  criticism,  then,  will  confine  itself  to  the  discussion 
of  our  principles  of  selection,  and  will  regard  the  particular 
plays  set  down  merely  as  the  representatives  of  their  respec- 
tive  classes  of  dramatic  literature.     If  our  scheme  were  to  be 


PREFACE  xxi 

realised  to-morrow,  it  is  more  than  probable  that  half  the 
plays  of  our  suggested  repertory  would  be  struck  out  and 
others  substituted  for  them  ;  though  there  is  not  much  pro- 
bability that  the  changes  would  bring  the  repertory  into 
closer    accord    with     the    personal     taste    of    any    individual 

reader. 

There  never  was,  and  there  never  will  be,  an  ideal  theatre. 
The  theatre  is  too  complex  and  delicate  a  machine,  depending 
on  the  harmonious  co-operation  of  too  many  talents  and  influ- 
ences, ever  to  reach  perfection  for  more  than  a  passing  moment. 
The  very  greatest  theatres  at  their  greatest  periods  have  been 
severely  criticised,  not,  as  a  rule,  without  reason.  The  reader, 
we  are  sure,  will  not  let  his  craving  for  what  is  ideally  desir- 
able render  him  careless  of  what  is  practically  desirable  as  an 
improvement  upon  existing  conditions.  And  he  will  not  fail 
to  bear  in  mind,  we  trust,  that  it  is  no  magical  recipe  we  are 
offering,  no  instant  and  miraculous  cure  for  all  the  shortcom- 
ings of  our  theatrical  life,  but  merely  a  plan  for  an  institution 
which,  being  based  on  sound  artistic  principles,  may  develop 
far  beyond  immediate  probabilities  or  possibilities,  and  may 
give  a  healthy  impulse  to  theatrical  progress  throughout  the 
English-speaking  world. 


POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE 

(1904) 

The  book  now  in  the  reader's  hands  is  a  second — one  might 
even  say  a  third  or  fourth — edition.  The  original  draft  has 
been  revised  and  re-revised  by  many  expert  critics,  and  has 
been  modified  in  numerous  particulars,  greatly  to  its  advan- 
tage. There  was  scarcely  a  figure  in  our  original  estimates 
which  was  not,  by  some  authorities,  declared  to  be  too  high, 
by  others,  too  low.  In  this  conflict  of  evidence,  we  have 
naturally  chosen  what  seemed  to  be  the  better  and  more 
strongly  supported  opinion ;  but  our  rule  has  always  been, 
"When  in  doubt,  increase  rather  than  diminish."  It  would 
be  absurd  to  suppose  that,  even  now,  all  our  estimates  are 
precisely  accurate ;  but  we  question  whether  they  can  be 
brought  much  nearer  to  accuracy  save  by  the  test  of  practical 
experiment. 

One  or  two  critics  have  thought  our  figures  too  low  all 
round,^  and  have  suggested  that  the  annual  outlay  would  be 
nearer  ;^8o,ooo  than  ;^7o,ooo,  requiring  an  average  receipt 
of  ;^2  20  a  performance  to  cover  it.  We  believe  that  they 
had  in  view  a  type  of  theatre  very  different  from  that  which 
we  have  outlined.  It  is  not  a  combination  under  one  roof 
of  His  Majesty's,  the   St.    James's,   and   the   Haymarket   that 

'  We   have   increased  them   at  several  points   since  this  opinion  was  expressed, 
but  not  very  materially. 


POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE  xxiii 

we  desire  to  see  achieved — not  a  theatre  which  shall  apply 
a  subsidy  to  competing,  by  their  own  methods,  with  the  un- 
subsidised  theatres — but  one  which  shall  show  what  artistic 
results  are  possible  under  a  wholly  different  system.  What 
is  wanted,  in  our  judgment,  is  an  object-lesson  to  the  English- 
speaking  world  of  the  possibility  of  a  thoroughly  dignified 
and  delightful  playhouse,  worthily  presenting  the  best  English 
(and  some  foreign)  dramatic  literature,  at  the  cost  of  com- 
paratively small  pecuniary  sacrifice  on  the  part  either  of  indi- 
viduals or  of  the  community.  The  Theatre  we  wish  to  see 
is  one  that  can  be  imitated  (with  modifications)  in  any  of 
the  great  cities  of  the  provinces  or  the  Empire,  not  one  which 
defies  imitation.  We  conceive  it  as  a  thing  to  be  desired  in 
itself,  no  doubt,  but  also  as  the  starting-point  of  a  great  move- 
ment. Therefore  we  regard  economy  not  merely  as  a  necessity 
likely  to  he  forced  upon  the  Theatre  for  lack  of  lavish  endow- 
ment, hut  as  the  indispensable  means  to  an  artistic  end. 

We  must  plead  guilty  to  a  certain  inconsistency  in  the 
structure  of  the  scheme.  While  the  repertory  sketched  out 
in  Section  IV.  is  admittedly  a  first-season  repertory,  the 
financial  estimates  do  not  apply  to  the  first  season  of  the 
Theatre,  but  assume  it  to  be  a  fully-established  "  going 
concern."  The  inconsistency  was  inevitable.  It  is  impossible 
to  foresee  the  repertory  of  the  future,  whereas  the  finances  of 
the  future  can,  and  must,  be  forecast.  The  reader  will  bear 
in  mind,  then,  that  the  figures  here  given  might  in  many 
cases  have  to  be  exceeded  during  the  first  few  seasons.  For 
instance,  actors  might  have  to  be  engaged  at  an  age  at  which 
they  could  scarcely  hope,  in  the  nature  of  things,  to  reap 
much  benefit  from  the  Pension  Fund.  In  that  case  their 
salaries  would  either  be  higher  than  we  have  forecast,  or  the 


xxiv  POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE 

Pension  Fund  regulation  by  which  an  actor  does  not  become 
"pensionable"  till  after  ten  years'  service  (see  pp.  137,  138) 
would  have  to  be  relaxed  in  their  favour.  To  take  another 
instance,  the  estimate  for  historical  costumes  might  have  to 
be  exceeded  for  a  few  seasons,  until  a  thoroughly  complete 
wardrobe  had  been  built  up.  Our  estimates,  in  short,  repre- 
sent rather  what  ought  to  be  aimed  at  than  what  can  be 
attained  at  a  single  bound.  The  losses  on  initial  seasons 
which  we  anticipate  on  pp.  116,  117,  would  be  quite  as 
likely  to  arise  from  excess  of  expenditure  as  from  defect  of 
receipts. 

The  labour  involved  in  running  a  Eepertory  Theatre,  with 
constant  changes  of  programme,  is  no  doubt  considerable, 
but  must  not  be  over-estimated.  Continental  experience  has 
amply  proved  that  with  complete  machinery,  good  organisa- 
tion, and  a  well  thought-out  routine,  all  difficulties  are  easily 
overcome.  Our  estimates  provide  for  a  staff  of  about  235 
people  permanently  attached  to  the  Theatre,  exclusive  of 
supernumeraries  and  other  persons  intermittently  employed. 
As  the  stage  is  assumed  to  be  fitted  with  the  most  modern 
labour-saving  appliances,  this  staff  can  scarcely  be  regarded 
as  inadequate.  At  the  same  time,  we  not  only  admit,  but 
emphasise  the  fact,  that  the  success  of  the  scheme  must 
depend  on  honest  and  ungrudging  work  on  the  part  of  all 
concerned.  The  work,  moreover,  must  be  steady  and  unre- 
mitting— not  feverish  and  fitful.  It  will  show  some  deficiency 
of  method  or  temper  in  the  management  if  the  employees,  as 
a  body,  do  not  ere  long  come  to  feel  the  stimulus  of  corporate 
spirit  and  loyalty  to  the  institution. 


POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE  xxv 

We  append  some  notes  on  various  Sections,  in  their  order, 
arising  out  of  criticisms  which  reached  us  too  late  to  be  dealt 
with  in  the  text. 

Section  II 

Page  lo.  It  is  suggested  that  the  right  to  nominate  a 
Trustee  should  be  conferred  upon  the  Actors'  Association, 
as  the  representative  body  of  the  theatrical  profession.  This 
proposal  should  at  any  rate  be  earnestly  considered  when 
the  time  comes  for  constituting  the  Board.  Perhaps  the 
number  of  the  Board  might  be  raised  to  seventeen,  one  nomina- 
tion being  accorded  to  the  Actors'  Association  and  one  to  the 
Society  of  Authors.  Or  one  of  the  nominations  assigned 
to  some  other  body  might  be  transferred  to  the  Actors' 
Association. 

Page  1 6.  Several  critics  have  thought  the  salary  of  ;^iooo 
allotted  to  the  Business  Manager  too  high,  and  have  suggested 
;^700  or  ;^8oo.  Our  reply  is  to  quote  the  following  passage 
from  a  theatrical  scheme  of  a  somewhat  similar  nature  drawn 
up  several  years  ago  by  a  man  of  very  wide  experience  in 
management,  which  has  been  privately  communicated  to  us: 
"In  the  administration,  one  essential  feature  would  be  to 
have  a  careful  checking  of  the  prices  of  all  materials  and 
goods  supplied,  timber,  canvas,  &c.  &c. ;  to  see  that  every- 
thing was  got  at  the  lowest  trade  price,  with  all  discounts 
taken  off,  and  that  no  commissions  were  offered  to,  solicited 
or  received  by,  any  official  or  employee.  For  this  purpose 
a  very  smart  and  reliable  official,  an  expert  in  such  matters, 
would  have  to  be  retained."  For  such  a  man,  ^looo  a  year 
seems  no  extravagant  salary. 


xxvi  POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE 

Section  III 

It  is  thought  by  some  critics  that  we  underrate  the  diffi- 
culty of  permanently  attaching  to  the  Theatre  actors  of  talent 
and  individuality.  "  As  soon  as  a  young  man  makes  a  little 
success,"  we  are  told,  "  an  American  impresario  will  offer  him 
;^50  a  week,  and  off  he  will  go."  As  a  matter  of  fact,  such 
cases  are  so  rare  as  to  be  practically  negligible.  It  is  only 
an  exceptional  combination  of  circumstances  that  renders  a 
young  English  actor  particularly  desirable  to  an  American 
impresario.  No  doubt,  however,  attempts  would  be  made, 
by  English  as  well  as  American  managers,  to  secure  the 
services  of  young  artists  of  talent  at  higher  salaries  than  the 
Theatre  could  afford  ;  and  in  some  cases  these  attempts  would 
be  successful.  It  is  not  pretended  that  the  management  would 
have  no  difficulties,  no  disappointments,  to  encounter.  No 
man  who  has  to  deal  with  other  men  (and  women)  has  ever 
escaped  occasional  worries  and  vexations ;  and  least  of  all  has 
the  Director  of  a  theatre  any  chance  of  being  exempt  from 
such  contrarieties.  This  Theatre,  however,  would  have  special 
claims  upon  the  loyalty  of  its  actors.  For  one  thing,  our 
proposed  furlough  system  would  help  the  Director  to  retain 
desirable  talents  without  calling  upon  them  for  superhuman 
renunciation.  But  the  main  point  to  be  noted  is  that  the 
Theatre — so  long,  at  least,  as  it  remained  the  only  Reper- 
tory Theatre  in  London — would  offer  unrivalled  opportunities 
to  a  young  actor  of  talent  and  ambition.  When  he  had 
made  a  marked  success  in  one  part,  he  could  count  on 
speedily  following  it  up  in  other  advantageous  characters ; 
whereas,  under  present  conditions,  an  actor  who  is  not  his  own 
manager  knows  that,  even  after  the  most  striking  success,  he 


POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE  xxvii 

may  sink  into  obscurity  again  for  years  before  he  finds  another 
part  that  offers  him  the  smallest  opportunity.  There  are  few 
actors  who  would  not  value  the  advantages  offered  by  this 
Theatre,  not  only  in  continuity  of  employment,  but  in  the 
certainty  of  achieving  distinction  proportionate  to  their  talent. 

The  simple  fee-system  suggested  in  this  Section  (pp. 
20-26)  is  not  the  only  one  possible.  At  the  Eoyal  Theatre, 
Copenhagen,  a  much  more  complicated  system  is  in  operation, 
and  is  said  to  answer  very  well.  Seven  and  a  half  per 
cent,  of  the  gross  receipts  of  each  performance  go  to  the 
actors  in  fees.  Moreover,  the  actors,  according  to  their 
status,  and  the  parts  according  to  their  length,  are  divided 
into  four  classes,  and  the  actual  fee  paid  represents  an 
average,  so  to  speak,  between  the  class  of  the  actor  and  the 
class  of  his  part.  The  highest  fee  will  fall  to  an  actor  of 
the  first  class  playing  a  part  of  the  first  class ;  an  actor  of 
the  first  class  playing  a  part  of  the  third  class  will  receive 
a  considerably  smaller  fee,  but  considerably  larger,  again, 
than  will  fall  to  an  actor  of  the  third  class  playing  a  part 
of  the  third  class.  We  are  told  that,  in  spite  of  its  apparent 
complexity,  this  system  works  simply  in  practice.  It  is  quite 
possible  that  some  adaptation  of  it  might  be  found  advan- 
tageous at  the  National  Theatre ;  but  it  does  not  seem  worth 
while,  at  this  stage,  to  discuss  the  question  at  length.  Two 
peculiarities  of  the  system  may  be  noted:  (i)  It  gives  the 
performers  a  direct  interest  in  the  receipts  of  each  evening; 
(2)  it  renders  a  play  with  few  parts  much  more  profitable 
to  the  actors  than  a  play  with  many  parts.  The  former 
peculiarity  might  or  might  not  prove  an  advantage  ;  the  latter 
is  surely  a  disadvantage. 

At  the  Th^atre-Franjais,  the  feux,  regulated  by  Napoleon, 


xxviii         POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE 

amount  to  ten  francs  a  performance  for  every  actor,  small  or 
great.  For  matindes,  which  were  not  foreseen  by  Napoleon, 
the  fee  is  fifty  francs.  This  rough-and-ready  system  is  felt 
to  be  a  serious  disadvantage,  since  it  leads  to  constant 
demands  for  congas  on  the  part  of  members  of  the  company 
who  wish  to  give  flying  performances  at  provincial  theatres, 
thus  earning  far  more  than  they  can  possibly  earn  when  on 
duty  in  Paris.  When  Repertory  Theatres  are  established  in 
the  provincial  cities  of  England,  the  question  will  doubt- 
less arise  whether  actors  of  the  National  Theatre  are  to  be 
allowed  to  accept  provincial  engagements  on  their  "off" 
nights.  Probably  such  engagements  should  be  altogether 
prohibited.  The  service  of  the  Theatre  could  not  but  suffer 
by  them ;  and  if  the  Director  were  empowered  to  make  any 
exception  to  the  rule,  he  would  always  be  harassed  by 
applications  for  one  or  two  nights'  leave,  nine-tenths  of 
which  it  would  be  his  duty  to  refuse. 

Section  V 

It  is  sometimes  asked  why  such  frequent  changes  of  bill 
are  necessary — why  one  play  should  not  be  performed  for  a 
week  or  a  fortnight  at  a  time,  thus  considerably  reducing 
the  amount  of  stage-labour  required  ?  We  reply  that  this 
system  is  unworkable  in  practice  ;  that,  so  far  as  we 
can  learn,  it  nowhere  obtains  ;  and  that  it  would  be 
certain  speedily  to  degenerate  into  the  long  run.  It  is 
essential,  in  order  to  make  the  most  of  a  successful  pro- 
duction (whether  new  or  old),  that  it  should  be  kept  con- 
stantly, though  not  continuously,  in  the  bills.  What  author 
would   consent   to   have   his   play  acted  for  (say)  a  fortnight, 


POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE  xxix 

then  taken  off  while  two  other  pieces  were  acted  for  a  week 
apiece,  then  resumed  for  a  week,  then  dropped  for  a  wek ; 
and  so  on?  It  is  clearly  preferable,  both  from  the  artistic 
and  the  business  point  of  view,  that  it  should  be  played  four 
or  five  times  a  week  (as  often,  in  fact,  as  the  regulations  of 
the  Theatre  will  permit)  for  an  indefinite  series  of  weeks, 
during  which  its  name  and  its  success  are  constantly  before 
the  public  eye.  If  it  were  possible  to  work  a  Repertory 
Theatre  satisfactorily  on  the  plan  of  changing  the  bill  week 
by  week  instead  of  day  by  day,  it  is  almost  inconceivable 
that  none  of  the  German  Repertory  Theatres  should  have 
adopted  it. 

Section  VII 

The  last  item  under  the  head  of  "  General  Expenses " 
p.  71)  calls  for  some  explanation.  It  runs  as  follows : — 
••Special  Production  Expenses,  ;^i569."  By  "Special  Pro- 
duction Expenses"  we  mean  any  extra  outlay  that  may  be 
incurred  in  connection  with  new  plays  or  revivals  which 
demand  unusual  elaboration  either  in  costumes  or  in  sceneiy, 
and  perhaps  some  "  overtime  "  work  in  rehearsal.  When  once 
the  Theatre  was  in  full  working  order,  the  last-mentioned 
cause  of  expense  should  seldom  come  into  play.  [It  will  be 
observed  that  in  Section  VI.,  p.  67,  ^542,  los.  is  set  down 
for  extra  payments  in  connection  with  dress  rehearsals.]  On 
the  other  hand,  a  play  requiring  special  costumes,  historical 
or  fantastic,  might  at  any  time  be  produced,  and  in  such 
a  case  some  extra  expenditure  would  have  to  be  sanctioned. 
During  the  first  four  or  five  years,  when  some  half-dozen 
Shakespearean  plays  were  each  season  being  added  to  the 
repertory,    expenses    of    this    nature    might    be    considerable. 


XXX  POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE 

But  when  once  the  twenty-five  plays  on  the  regular  Shake- 
spearean list  (see  p.  39)  had  been  added  to  the  stock,  there 
would  probably  not  be  more  than  three  or  four  productions 
in  a  season  that  would  demand  any  extraordinary  outlay. 
We  believe  then  that,  taking  one  season  with  another,  ;i^i5oo 
is  a  sufficient  allowance  under  this  head.  The  £(i<^  added 
to  this  estimate  is  not,  we  admit,  due  to  nicety  of  calcula- 
tion, but  to  our  desire  to  avoid  certain  troublesome  and 
costly  readjustments  of  accounts. 

Appendix  B 

Page  137.  According  to  Rule  III.  of  the  Pension  Fund 
regulations,  the  term  of  service  necessary  before  an  actor  or 
actress  becomes  "pensionable"  is  ten  years.  This  term  might 
possibly  prove  to  be  unnecessarily  and  inconveniently  long. 
We  are  disposed  to  think  that  a  six  years'  term  of  service 
would  be  sufiicient — that  a  performer  should  become  pension- 
able on  entering  upon  his  or  her  third  consecutive  engage- 
ment, each  engagement  being,  of  course,  for  three  years.  In 
this  case  an  actor's  pension-claim  would  amount  to  12  per 
cent,  of  his  salary  after  six  years,  instead  of  20  per  cent, 
after  ten  years ;  and  the  rate  of  yearly  increase  would  pro- 
bably remain  as  set  forth  in  Rule  V.,  p.  138.  This  re- 
arrangement might  involve  somewhat  earlier  and  somewhat 
larger  drafts  upon  the  Pension  Fund  than  we  had  anticipated ; 
but  there  seems  to  be  no  doubt  that  if  the  Theatre  were  at 
all  prosperous,  the  income  of  the  Fund,  under  the  arrange- 
ment we  suggest  on  p.  135,  would  be  equal  to  all  claims 
upon  it. 


CONTENTS 

PREFACE 

In  the  Form  of  a  Letter  from  One  Author  to  the  Other       .         .         .    vii-xiv 
Xeed  for  a  National  Theatre — Large-scale  Effort  v.  Small-scale  Effort 

— State  Aid  c.  Private  Munificence xv-xxi 

Postscript-Prologue  .         • xxii-xxx 

SECTION  I 

Scope  of  our  Enquiry — Limits  of  desirable  Endowment — A  Special 
Building  indispensable — Probable  Cost  of  Site  and  of  Building — 
Site  might  be  provided  by  a  Public  Body — The  Guarantee  Fund — 
General  Forecast  of  Expenses .     .         .         .         .         •         .         .         1-9 

SECTION  II 

The  Board  of  Ti-ustees — ^Its  Constitution  and  Functions — The  General 

Staff — The  Reading  Committee — Salaries  of  the  General  Staff      .     10-16 

SECTION  III 

Actors  and  Actresses — Methods  of  Selection — Payment  by  Salary  and 
Fees  —  Convenience  of  Fee  System  —  Conditions  of  Engagement 
— Salary  List — Material  and  Artistic  Advantages  offered  by  the 
Theatre  to  its  Company — Summary  of  Performers'  Salaries  ,  .     17-35 

SECTION  IV 

Hepertory  for  a  Specimen  Season — The  Theatre  not  a  Pioneer  Theatre 
— Principles  of  Selection — Shakespeare — The  Elizabethan  Drama — 
Restoration  Comedy — Eighteenth-Century  Comedy — Early  Victorian 
and  Mid- Victorian  Plays — Modern  Revivals — Xew  Plays — Foreign 
Plays,  Classical  and  Modern — Analysis  and  Schedule  of  Repertory    36-60 

SECTION  V 
Expenses  in  Front  of  the  House — Refreshments — Music     ,         ,         .     61-65 


xxxii  CONTENTS 

SECTION  VI 


PAGE 


Expenses  behind  the  Scenes — System  of  Producing  66-70 

SECTION  VII 

General  Expenses :  Scenery,  Dresses,  Lighting,  Advertising,  ifec.  7  x-7  7 

SECTION  VIII 

The  Auditorium — Seat  Capacity  and  Money  Capacity — Prices — Subscrip- 
tion (Abonnement)  Sj'stem  ...,•..       78-88 

SECTION  IX 
Relation  of  the  Theatre  to  Living  Authors — Royalties       .         .         .       89-95 

SECTION  X 

The  Training-School — Principles  and  Regulations — A  possible  Dramatic 

College 96-102 

SECTION  XI 

General  Summary  of  Expenses — Receipts  required  to  meet  Expenses — 

Possibilities  and  Probabilities — Order  of  Procedure  .         .         .     103-111 

SECTION  XII 

The  Guarantee  Fund — The  Amount  required — Provisions  for  its  Ad- 
ministration— How  to  Wind  up  in  Case  of  Failure — How  to  Apply 
the  Surplus  in  Case  of  Success — The  Sinking  Fund  .         .         ,     1 12-124 


APPENDICES 

A.  Dkaft  of  Statutes  and  Regulations 127-134 

B.  Pension  Fund  Suggestions i3S-i39 

C      Subscription  and  Booking  Ststem 140-148 

D.  Casts  of  Plays        .........  149-166 

E.  The  Theory    of    Theatrical    Endowment  :    Extracts    from 

Speeches  and  Articles    .......  167-177 


NATIONAL    THEATRE 


SECTION   I 

Scope  of  our  Enquiry — Limits  of  Desirable  Endowment — A  Special  Building 
indispensable — Probable  cost  of  Site  and  of  Building — Site  might  be 
provided  by  a  Public  Body — The  Guarantee  Fund — General  Forecast  of 

Expenses. 

The  Theatre  to  which  the  following  scheme  and  estimates 
refer  is  conceived  to  be  a  free  gift  to  the  Nation,  represented 
by  a  Board  of  Trustees.  Assuming  that  the  theatre-building, 
with  an  initial  stock  of  scenery,  costumes,  furniture,  and  other 
requisites,  is  placed,  free  of  rent,  taxes,  and  insurance  premium, 
at  the  disposal  of  the  management,  our  purpose  is  to  ascertain 
as  accurately  as  may  be  the  probable  yearly  cost  of  presenting 
a  worthy  repertory  in  a  worthy  fashion.  Dividing,  then,  the 
total  outlay  by  the  number  of  performances  given  in  the 
season,^  we  learn  the  nightly  average  of  receipts  required  to 
render  the  Theatre  independent  of  any  endowment  beyond  that 
involved  in  its  freedom  from  the  burden  of  rent,  &c. 

This    method  we  have  adopted  not   only  for  the    sake   of 
simplicity,  but  because  we  believe  that  the  measure  of  endow- 

•  We  have  calculated  for  a  season  of  forty-six  weeks,  from  the  middle  of  September 
to  the  end  of  July,  thus  leaving  six  weeks  for  holidays,  for  repairs  and  cleaning,  and 
for  preparations  for  the  new  season.  It  is  questionable  whether  so  long  a  recess  would 
be  found  necessary,  and  whether  it  might  not  be  advisable  to  keep  the  Theatre  open 
during  August.  It  will  be  observed  that  in  a  repertory  theatre,  actora  and  actresses 
can  have  their  necessary  holidays  without  involving  the  closing  of  the  Theatre.  All 
salaries  payable  in  weekly  sums,  we  have  calculated  at  fifty  weeks. 

A 


2  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

ment  implied  in  freedom  from  rent,  taxes,  &c.,  is  about  the 
right  one.  We  believe,  on  the  one  hand,  that  it  is  impossible 
worthily  to  present  a  worthy  repertory  at  a  playhouse  held  on 
the  onerous  terms  which  now  prevail.  But  we  believe,  on 
the  other  hand,  that  if  a  theatre,  freed  from  the  burden  of 
rent,  &c.,  cannot  at  least  clear  its  working  expenses  season 
by  season,  the  probable  deduction  is  that  the  management 
must  either  be  culpably  extravagant  or  conducted  on  some 
mistaken  principle.  A  theatre  which  appeals  to  no  public,  or 
to  a  very  narrow  one,  cannot  be  a  National  Theatre  in  any  true 
sense  of  the  word.  It  is  well,  then,  that  the  management 
should  have  to  keep  steadily  before  its  eyes  the  necessity  of 
making  its  rent-and-tax-free  theatre  otherwise  self-supporting. 
A  Guarantee  Fund  would  have  to  be  provided  to  meet  the 
possibility  of  losses,  and  for  a  few  initial  seasons  it  might 
even  have  to  be  drawn  upon.  But  if,  when  the  institution 
had  had  time  to  get  into  working  order,  its  receipts  still  fell 
considerably  below  its  expenses,  that  fact  might  be  taken  as 
showing  that  it  was  either  misconceived  or  mismanaged.  The 
method  of  dealing  with  this  eventuality  would  have  to  be 
prescribed  in  its  Statutes.  Suggestions  as  to  the  possible 
winding-up  of  the  Theatre  will  be  found  in  Section  XII.,  and 
in  the  Draft  Statutes  on  p.  130. 

One  thing  it  is  important  to  make  clear  at  the  outset, 
namely,  that  our  estimates  presuppose  a  theatre-building  wholly 
different  fr-om  any  now  existing  in  London.  We  believe  that 
such  an  enterprise  would  be  almost  impossibly  handicapped  in 
any  building  not  specially  designed  for  this  particular  purpose. 
At  all  events,  our  estimates  are  based  on  the  assumption  that 
the  stage  is  provided  with  aU  the  most  recent  labour-saving 
machinery ;  that  there  is  a  rehearsal-room,  reproducing  the  pro- 


THE   BUILDING  3 

portions  of  the  stage,  and  ample  wardrobe  and  property  rooms, 
behind  the  scenes ;  that  a  scenery  store  is  provided  as  near  the 
Theatre  as  County  Council  regulations  -will  allow  ;  that  the  audi- 
torium, though  not  unduly  large,  is  so  arranged  that  every  seat 
has  a  full  view  of  the  stage,  no  one  seat  in  any  given  portion  of 
the  house  being  notably  preferable  to  any  other  seat ;  that  the 
heating  and  ventilating  appliances  are  as  perfect  as  science 
can  make  them ;  that  the  space  between  the  rows  and  the 
mechanism  of  the  seats  make  movement  practicable  without 
discomfort;  and  that  a  spacious  vestibule  and  Saloon,^  with 
refreshment-rooms,  smoking-rooms,  and  cloak-rooms,  are  pro- 
vided for  the  comfort  of  the  audience.  These  things  we  hold 
indispensable  to  the  success  of  a  National  Theatre. 

It  is  evident  from  what  we  have  stated  that  before  the 
enterprise  can  be  set  on  foot  there  are  three  things  to  be 
provided : 

1.  The  Site. 

2.  The  Building. 

3.  The  Guarantee  Fund. 

There  is  no  reason  why  all  three  should  not  be  provided  by 
one  and  the  same  Donor.  We  hope  to  show  in  the  sequel 
that  no  fabulous  wealth  is  required  to  face  the  whole  outlay 
and  the  whole  risk.  Nevertheless,  the  three  constituent  parts 
of  the  enterprise  are  quite  distinct  from  one  another,  and 
might  be  furnished  by  different  Donors  and  on  somewhat 
different  terms.  The  ideal  event,  perhaps,  would  be  that 
the  whole  institution  should  be  due  to  the  munificence  of  one 

'  We  use  the  word  Saloon,  for  want  of  a  better,  to  designate  the  hall  (in  French 
the  foyer)  where  the  audience  gathers  between  the  acts  for  fresh  air  and  conversation. 
In  the  Theatre  here  outlined  (as  will  appear  in  Section  V.)  it  might  also  be  called  the 
Music-Room. 


4  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

man.  Many  difficulties  and  delays  would  thus  be  obviated ; 
and  such  a  conspicuous  example  of  public  spirit  could  not 
but  have  the  happiest  effect.  If  no  one  man,  however,  can 
be  found  to  undertake  the  duty,  we  suggest  that  the  most 
probable,  and  perhaps  the  most  desirable,  partition  of  the 
enterprise  would  be  as  follows  :  that  the  Site  should  be  pro- 
vided by  a  public  body,  the  Building  by  an  individual  Donor, 
and  the  Guarantee  Fund  by  a  number  of  private  contributors. 

It  is  impossible  to  arrive  at  a  definite  estimate  of  the  pro- 
bable cost  of  the  site  and  the  theatre-building.  The  price  of 
any  given  site  could  be  ascertained  only  after  negotiations, 
which  it  would  be  idle  to  set  on  foot  until  there  was  some 
immediate  prospect  of  actually  acquiring  it ;  and  the  cost  of 
the  building  would  in  great  measure  depend  on  the  nature 
of  the  site.  Therefore,  the  figures  given  in  the  following 
paragraphs  must  be  taken  as  rough  approximations,  formed, 
however,  after  consultation  with  competent  authorities. 

Though  the  auditorium  would  be  of  moderate  dimensions 
(see  Section  VIII.),  the  area  occupied  by  the  whole  building — 
vestibule,  staircases,  Saloon,  refreshment-rooms,  corridors,  stage, 
dressing-rooms,  and  all  appurtenances  and  offices — would  neces- 
sarily be  very  considerable.  The  regulations  of  the  County 
Council  now  (very  properly)  require  that  half  the  boundary- 
line  of  every  theatre  shall  stand  free  from  other  buildings ; 
and  it  would  be  most  desirable  that  the  National  Theatre 
should  occupy  a  site  still  more  open  and  self-contained,  so  to 
speak,  than  the  regulations  demand.  On  the  other  hand, 
though  the  Theatre  ought  not  to  be  placed  in  a  what  may  be 
called  an  out-of-the-way  locality,  it  is  not  in  the  least  neces- 
sary that  it  should  occupy  a  site  on  one  of  the  great  theatrical 
thoroughfares.     It    would  not    be   one   of  the    theatres    which 


THE    SITE  5 

rely  for  a  considerable  proportion  of  their  nightly  audiences 
upon  the  floating  hotel  population,  and  the  mere  chance 
passer-by.  Any  reasonably  central  and  accessible  situation 
would  suit  its  purposes.  It  need  not  compete  with  speculators 
for  such  sites  as  would  have  a  special  value  for  commercial 
managers.  It  is  to  be  remembered  in  this  connection  that 
facilities  for  rapid  transit  are  yearly  increasing  in  London, 
and  that  tubes,  subways,  and  motor-omnibuses  will  soon 
bring  within  the  practicable  radius  sites  which,  at  the  present 
moment,  might  seem  inconvenient. 

Taking  all  these  circumstances  into  consideration,  we  con- 
clude that  the  inside  figure  for  the  value  of  the  site  would 
be  ^50,000,  the  outside  figure  ^100,000.  A  site  which  could 
at  a  pinch  be  made  available  could  probably  be  obtained  for 
the  former  sum,  an  almost  ideal  site  for  the  latter  sum.  Taking 
the  mean  between  the  two,  we  may  put  down  the  probable 
value  of  the  site  at  ^75,000. 

We  say  the  "value"  rather  than  the  "price"  of  the  site, 
for  it  does  not  at  all  follow  that  this  price  would  have  to  be 
paid.  Though  we  believe  it  impracticable  to  go  to  Parliament 
for  the  whole  sinews  of  war,  we  see  no  reason  why,  if  the 
theatre  -  building  and  the  Guarantee  Fund  were  definitely 
promised,  the  Government  or  the  County  Council  should  not 
make  over  to  the  enterprise  one  of  the  sites  at  their  disposal, 
on  more  favourable  terms  than  could  be  obtained  in  the  open 
market.  It  is  probable  that  in  the  County  Council,  at  any 
rate,  such  a  proposition  would  receive  a  good  deal  of  support ; 
and  the  parliamentary  power  to  grant  a  site  could  probabh'  be 
obtained  without  much  difficulty.  In  granting  a  site,  of  course, 
a  public  body,  no  less  than  a  private  Donor,  would  make  precise 
stipulations  as  to  the  reversion  of  its  gift  in  the  event  of  the 


6  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

enterprise  failing,  and  the  Theatre  being  applied  to  ordinary 
commercial  uses.  Suggestions  as  to  the  nature  of  the  pro- 
visions to  be  made  in  view  of  such  an  event  will  be  found  in 
Section  XII. 

As  to  the  theatre-building,  the  inside  estimate  of  its  cost 
may  be  placed  at  ^50,000,  the  outside  estimate  at  ;if  80,000.* 
This  would  include  the  installation  of  a  perfectly  equipped 
stage,  the  cost  of  which  would  be  about  ;^  10,000.  We  suggest 
that  while  architectural  dignity  without,  and  safety  and  comfort 
within,  would  of  course  be  essential,  little  or  nothing  should,  in 
the  first  instance,  be  expended  on  costly  decorative  materials. 
The  architect  should  design  the  details  of  the  interior  with 
a  special  view  to  their  being  gradually  enriched  by  the  gifts  of 
individual  Donors  who,  appreciating  the  value  of  the  Theatre 
as  an  artistic  and  social  institution,  might  desire  to  enhance 
its  beauty  at  this  point  or  at  that.  One  such  Donor  might  put 
in  a  marble  staircase,  another  a  mosaic  floor  to  the  vestibule, 
a  third  might  present  busts  to  occupy  empty  niches,  a  fourth 
might  fill  with  appropriate  paintings  the  medallions  and  panels 
of  the  auditorium.  Not  until  the  institution  had  proved  its 
value  should  money  be  expended  on  mere  ornament,  beyond 
what  is  essential  to  seemliness,  cheerfulness,  and  a  general  sense 
of  comfort.  The  Theatre  should  not,  at  the  outset,  be  a  palace 
of  art,  but  neither  should  it  be  a  gaunt  and  depressing  barrack. 

As  above  indicated,  we    think   that    the    provision    of   the 

•  The  Donor  would  also  have  to  provide,  roughly  speaking,  three-fourths  of  the 
scenery,  costumes,  &c.,  required  for  the  opening  season,  so  that  the  outlay  chargeable 
to  the  season's  account  should  be  approximately  that  of  an  ordinary  year,  when  the 
Theatre  was  in  its  normal  working  order.  This  initial  equipment,  as  appears  in 
Section  VII.,  would  probably  cost  something  under  ;£  16,000.  The  cost  of  armour, 
weapons,  musical  instruments,  &c.,  might  bring  this  sum  up  to  ^20,000 ;  while  another 
£2000  or  ;i{^4ooo  might  have  to  be  provided  for  salaries  payable  before  the  opening 
of  the  Theatre.  Thus  the  whole  gift  of  the  Donor  of  the  building  might  amount,  in 
round  numbers,  to  ;^io5,ooo. 


GUARANTEE    FUND  7 

Building,  as  distinct  from  the  Site  and  the  Guarantee  Fund, 
ought  to  be  undertaken  by  one  individual  Donor.  Unlike  the 
two  other  constituent  parts  of  the  enterprise,  the  building  is 
a  visible,  tangible  entity,  an  organism,  a  work  of  art.  It  is, 
therefore,  fitting  that  it  should  be  the  record  and  monument 
of  one  great  effort  of  public  spirit,  rather  than  of  many  small. 
An  "  Ex  Done "  inscription  should  of  course  occupy  the  place 
of  honour  in  the  vestibule ;  and  that  such  an  inscription  may 
in  itself  be  a  work  of  art,  its  centre-point  must  be  one  name, 
not  a  catalogue  of  many.  The  civic  pride  which  impelled  the 
Romans  to  write  their  names  in  letters  of  bronze  on  the  edifices 
with  which  they  adorned  the  city  was  no  ignoble  sentiment,  nor 
unworthy  of  imitation.' 

The  Guarantee  Fund,  on  the  other  hand,  might  advantage- 
ously be  provided  in  comparatively  small  sums,  by  a  large  body 
of  contributors.  The  reason  is  simple  :  the  more  numerous  are 
the  people  interested  in  the  success  of  the  Theatre,  the  more 
likely  is  it  to  succeed.  The  Donor,  under  the  arrangement  we 
propose,  would  gain  in  money  by  the  failure  of  the  enterprise. 
In  the  event  of  success,  his  gift,  conditional  at  the  outset,  would 
become  absolute  ;  whereas,  in  the  event  of  failure,  a  certain 
proportion  of  his  outlay  would,  on  the  liquidation  of  the  enter- 
prise, come  back  to  him.  But  as  the  success  of  the  enterprise 
would  mean  the  complete  reimbursement  of  the  Guarantors,* 
they  would  have  a  direct  interest  in  furthering  its  welfare. 

'  A  box,  opposite  or  adjacent  to  the  Royal  Box,  should  be  the  property  of  the 
Donor  and  his  heirs  in  perpetuity ;  but  when  once  the  mechanism  of  the  Theatre  had 
been  set  in  motion,  this  should  be  the  sole  personal  privilege  claimed  or  enjoyed  by 
the  Donor. 

*  We  use  the  words  ''  Guarantors "  and  "  Guarantee  Fund "  for  the  sake  of  con- 
venience, though  the  money  would  have  to  be,  not  only  promised,  but  fully  paid-up. 
It  would,  then,  be  of  the  nature  of  a  loan,  bearing  no  interest,  and  repayable  in  full  or 
in  part  according  to  circumstances. 


8  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

The  Guarantors  might  have  a  voice  in  the  appointment  of  the 
first  Board  of  Trustees ;  but  it  is  more  probable  that  the  Board 
would  be  appointed  before  the  Guarantee  Fund  was  formed.  In 
any  case,  when  once  the  Board  of  Trustees  was  appointed  and 
had  entered  on  its  duties,  neither  the  Donors  of  the_  Site,  the 
Donor  of  the  Building,  nor  the  Guarantors  should  have  any 
power  of  interference  with  the  government  of  the  institution. 
A  set  of  Statutes  should  be  drawn  up  and  accepted  by  the  Trus- 
tees, clearly  prescribing  their  duties,  and  the  course  to  be  taken 
by  them  in  all  possible  eventualities  of  success  or  failure. 
When  once  the  machinery  of  government,  as  provided  by  the 
Statutes,  was  fairly  set  in  motion,  the  influence  of  the  Donors 
and  Guarantors  ^  on  the  conduct  of  the  Theatre  would  be  neither 
more  nor  less  than  that  of  any  other  members  of  the  outside 
public.  The  Statutes  should  at  any  time  be  alterable  by  Act 
of  Parliament,  and  by  Act  of  Parliament  only.  It  would  always 
be  open  to  any  dissatisfied  party  to  agitate  for  an  Act  of  Recon- 
stitution.  The  difficulty  of  obtaining  it  would  perhaps  be  no 
more  than  a  reasonable  safeguard  against  idle  and  mischievous 
meddling. 

For  reasons  set  forth  at  length  in  the  following  pages,  we 
think  that  the  Guarantee  Fund  ought  to  amount  to  ;i^  150,000. 
The  conditions  under  which  the  Guarantors  ought  to  provide 
it  are  discussed  in  Section  XII. 

It  will  be  seen,  then,  that  our  estimate  of  the  total  sum 
required  to  set  a  National  or  Central  Theatre  afoot  with  every 
probability  of  success  (as  success  is  above  defined)  amounts  to 
;^3 30,000.     The    Site  would  represent  ;^7 5,000  ;  the  Building 

'  The  question  of  inducements  to  the  Guarantors  is  discussed  in  Section  XII,, 
p.  1 23,  the  conclusion  arrived  at  being  that  it  is  unnecessary  and  practically  impos- 
sible to  offer  them  any  material  advantage  as  a  spur  to  their  public  spirit. 


TOTAL   RISK  9 

and  equipment,  ^105,000;  and  the  Guarantee  Fund,  ;£i50,ooo. 
We  have  admitted  that  the  Site  and  Building  estimates  (but  not 
the  Guarantee  Fund  estimate)  are  rough  approximations.  Sup- 
posing that  we  are  ^50,000  out  in  our  reckoning,  and  that  a 
total  of  ^380,000  proved  to  be  necessary,  is  that  a  sum  which 
should  have  any  terrors  for  the  wealth  and  public  spirit  of 
England  1 

In  the  event  of  success,  the  artistic,  social,  and  even  poli- 
tical benefits  of  the  institution  would  be  very  cheaply  bought. 
It  would  restore  the  English  drama  to  that  honourable  place 
among  the  intellectual  achievements  of  the  race  which  it  has  for 
so  long  forfeited,  and  it  would  be  a  radiating  centre  of  the  best 
artistic  influences.  In  the  event  of  utter  failure,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  whole  of  the  ;^38o,ooo  would  not  be,  so  to  speak, 
thrown  into  the  sea,  as  more  than  twice  that  amount  would  be 
in  the  loss  of  a  single  battleship.  As  will  be  seen  in  Section 
XII.,  we  calculate  that,  if  the  enterprise  entirely  failed,  and 
had  to  be  liquidated  under  the  conditions  set  forth  in  the 
Statutes,  all  contributors  to  it  would  "stand  to  lose"  from  50  to 
60  per  cent,  (but  not  more)  of  their  respective  contributions. 


SECTION    II 

The  Board  of  Trustees — Its  Constitution  and  Functions — The  General  Staff — 
The  Reading  Committee — Salaries  of  the  General  Staff. 

As  before  stated,  the  ownership  and  ultimate  government  (as 
distinct  from  the  management)  of  the  institution  should  be 
vested  in  a  Board  of  Trustees.'  The  Board,  we  suggest,  should 
consist  of  fifteen  members,  and  should  be  thus  constituted  : — The 
right  to  nominate  one  member  should  be  permanently  vested  in 
each  of  the  following  bodies  : — 

The  University  of  Oxford. 
The  University  of  Cambridge. 
The  University  of  London. 
The  Royal  Academy. 

The  right  to  nominate  two  members  should  be  vested  in  the 
London  County  Council.  The  remaining  nine  members  should, 
in  the  first  instance,  be  appointed  by  the  Donor  or  Donors  of  the 
site  and  building,  and  as  vacancies  occurred  (by  death  or  resig- 
nation) among  the  Trustees  thus  appointed,  the  vacancies  should 
be  filled  up  alternately  by  co-optation  (all  members  of  the  Board 
having  power  to  vote),  and  by  Royal  nomination,  under  the 
advice  of  the  Prime  Minister. 

The  function  of  the  Trustees  should  be  somewhat  analogous 
to  that  of  the  Trustees  of  the  British  Museum.     They  should 


'  Further  details  concerning  the  constitution  and  duties  of  the  Board  of  Trustees 
will  be  found  in  the  Draft  Statutes,  Appendix  A. 


THE   TRUSTEES  ii 

not,  as  a  rule,  meet  oftener  than  once  a  quarter,  or  even  twice 
a  year,  though  the  President  should  have  power  to  convene 
extraordinary  meetings  on  the  written  request  of  one-third  of 
the  Board. 

The  Trustees  should  appoint  a  Director  and  General  Staff  (to 
be  hereafter  specified),  but  all  other  appointments  and  engage- 
ments should  be  made  by  the  Director  alone. 

The  Trustees  should  receive  and  pass  (if  necessary,  with  re- 
servations and  censures)  the  Director's  quarterly  or  half-yearly 
report,  artistic  and  financial.  They  should  also  serve  as  the 
sole  Court  of  Appeal  from  the  decisions  of  the  Director. 
Should  the  Trustees,  on  crucial  questions,  give  a  decision 
adverse  to  the  Director,  it  would  probably  be  held  tantamount 
to  asking  for  his  resignation. 

It  cannot  be  too  clearly  understood  that  the  Trustees  would 
have  no  executive  power  except  through  the  medium  of  the 
Director.  It  would  be  his  duty  either  to  give  effect  to  their 
views,  or  to  try  to  bring  them  over  to  his  ;  and,  failing  in  that 
(on  questions  of  importance),  to  resign. 

The  Director  and  other  members  of  the  General  Staff  would 
have  a  right  to  appear  in  person  before  the  Trustees,  and  (if 
necessary)  express  and  defend  their  views.  It  would  be  for  the 
Trustees  themselves  to  decide  by  what  method  of  representation 
other  persons  should,  individually  or  collectively,  appear  before 
them. 

If  it  be  asked  whether  it  would  be  possible  to  find  in 
England  fifteen  men,  of  such  position  as  to  qualify  them  for 
the  office  of  Trustee,  who  should  at  the  same  time  possess  any 
special  knowledge  of  theatrical  matters,  we  reply  that  no  special 
knowledge  is  required.  There  might  probably  be  one  or  two 
men-of-the-theatre   on   the    Board — such    men    as    Sir    Henry 


12  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

Irving,  Sir  Squire  Bancroft,  Mr.  John  Hare  or  Mr.  W.  S. 
Gilbert — but  even  such  a  leavening  of  the  mass  would  not  be 
indispensable.  The  function  of  the  Board  is  merely  to  serve 
as  a  safeguard  against  abuses,  and  to  ensure  that,  in  a  general 
way,  the  Theatre  shall  faithfully  serve  the  pui-poses  for  which 
it  is  designed.  Such  duties  belong  rather  to  men  of  general 
culture  and  knowledge  of  the  world  than  to  theatrical  experts. 
The  Trustees  of  the  British  Museum  are  not  required  to  be 
specialists  in  archaeology,  or  bibliography,  or  numismatics,  or 
palaeontology.  The  Trustees  of  the  National  Theatre  would, 
as  we  have  said,  confer  upon  experts  the  whole  executive 
control  of  the  institution ;  and,  this  done,  their  business  would 
simply  be  to  take  care  that  the  experts  did  not  abuse  their 
position  or  otherwise  belie  the  confidence  reposed  in  them. 
A  meddlesome  body  of  Trustees  might,  indeed,  do  a  great 
deal  of  harm  ;  but  there  is  no  reason  to  anticipate  any  special 
difficulty  in  finding  men  for  the  office  who  would  fill  it  with 
tact  and  judgment. 

Though  we  purposely  refrain  from  any  attempt  to  draw  out  a 
list  of  probable  Trustees,  we  cannot  but  suggest  that  if  the  Prince 
of  Wales  would  consent  to  accept  a  nomination  to  the  Board, 
he  would  naturally  be  elected  its  first  President. 


The  General  Stafi",  to  be  appointed  by  the  Trustees,  would 
consist  of  five  officials  : — 

(i)  The  Director,  who  should  have  absolute  control  of  every- 
thing in  and  about  the  Theatre,  engagement  of  actors,  casting  of 
parts,  &c.,  &c.,  excepting  only  the  selection  of  plays.  For  this 
purpose,  he  would  have  one  vote  in  a  Reading  Committee  of 


THE   GENERAL  STAFF  13 

three,  to  be  hereafter  provided  for.  In  all  other  matters,  there 
would  be  no  appeal  from  the  authority  of  the  Director,  except  to 
the  Trustees. 

(2)  The  Literary  Manager,  an  official  answering  to  the 
German  Dramaturg.  His  duties  should  be  to  weed  out  new 
plays  before  they  are  submitted  to  the  Reading  Committee ;  to 
suggest  plays  for  revival  and  arrange  them  for  the  stage ;  to 
follow  the  dramatic  movement  in  foreign  countries,  and  to 
suggest  foreign  plays  suitable  for  production  ;  to  consult  with 
the  scene-painter,  producers,  &c.,  on  questions  of  archaeology, 
costume,  and  local  colour. 

The  Literary  Manager  would  be  a  member  of  the  Reading 
Committee,  but  in  all  other  matters  would  be  subordinate  and 
responsible  to  the  Director. 

(3)  The  Business  Manager,  who  would  (subject  to  the 
Director)  control  the  whole  financial  working  of  the  Theatre, 
keep  its  accounts,  sanction  all  expenditure,  and  check  the 
estimates  of  subordinate  officials.  He  should  make  a  quarterly 
or  half-yearly  financial  report  to  the  Trustees,  to  be  counter- 
signed by  the  Director. 

(4)  TJie  Solicitor,  who  should  act  as  Secretary  to  the  Board 
of  Trustees,  and  advise  the  Trustees  in  the  investment  of  the 
Guarantee  Fund,  Sinking  Fund,  &c.,  and  the  Director  on  con- 
tracts and  other  legal  matters  connected  with  the  management 
of  the  Theatre.  He  would  not  be  expected  to  give  more  than 
a  portion  of  his  time  to  these  duties. 

(5)  The  Reading  Committee  Man,  a  third  member  of  the 
Reading  Committee,  who  ought  to  have  no  other  function  in 
connection  with  the  Theatre,  and  to  be,  so  far  as  possible,  out- 
side its  atmosphere.  He  would  not  be  expected  to  give  more 
than  a  portion  of  his  time  to  the  work  of  the  Committee. 


14  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

It  should  be  strictly  enjoined  that  no  play  should  be 
accepted  which  had  not  been  read  or  heard  by  all  three  Com- 
mittee-men, and  fully  discussed  in  Committee.  If  at  any  time 
two  members  of  the  Committee  constituted  themselves  a  per- 
manent majority,  and  systematically  overruled  or  ignored  the 
views  of  the  third  member,  it  would  be  the  duty  of  the  third 
member  to  present  a  minority  report  to  the  Trustees,  calling 
their  attention  to  this  abuse.  The  result  might  or  might  not  be 
a  reconstitution  of  the  Committee. 

When  once  a  play  was  selected  for  production  or  revival  ^  by 
a  majority  of  the  Committee,  it  would  be  the  duty  of  the  Director 
to  take  measures  for  placing  it  on  the  stage  within  a  reasonable 
time.  For  the  casting  of  parts,  fixing  the  date  of  production, 
&c.,  &c.,  he  alone  would  be  responsible.  It  would  also  lie  with 
him  to  determine  how  often  it  should  be  repeated  ;  though  in 
time,  no  doubt,  a  custom  would  arise  by  which  the  amount  of 
the  receipts  produced  by  a  play,  together  with  their  upward  or 
downward  tendency,  would  be  taken  as  almost  automatically 
prescribing  its  continuance  or  discontinuance. 

It  is  evident  that  the  Director  might  conceivably  wreck  the 
fortunes  of  a  play  which  he  disliked ;  but  even  if  loyalty  to  his 
colleagues  did  not  check  this  tendency,  care  for  his  own  reputa- 
tion would  not  permit  its  frequent  indulgence.  At  the  same  time 
it  would  be  only  natural  and  not  undesirable,  that  his  colleagues 
should  be  chary  of  forcing  a  production  upon  him,  very  much 

'  A  non-copyright  play,  once  produced,  would  be  considered  as  forming  part  of  the 
current  repertory  {repertoire  courant)  for  that  season  and  the  two  seasons  following, 
the  Director  having  the  right  to  put  it  up  for  performance  at  any  time,  without  con- 
sulting the  Reading  Committee.  But  after  these  seasons  had  elapsed,  it  would  have 
to  be  re-considered  and  re-sanctioned  by  the  Committee  before  it  could  be  again 
performed.  When  re-sanctioned,  its  lease  of  life  would  be  renewed  for  another  three 
years,  and  so  on.    The  rule  as  to  copyright  plays  ia  discussed  in  Section  IX. 


READING   COMMITTEE  15 

against  his  will.  He  would,  in  fact,  have  a  sort  of  suspensive 
veto  upon  any  given  production,  to  be  overruled  only  in  cases 
which,  to  his  colleagues,  seemed  matters  of  principle. 

It  has  been  suggested  by  a  critic  of  high  authority  that  the 
Director  should  be  accorded  a  certain  amount  of  independent 
power  with  regard  to  the  production  of  plays — that,  for  instance, 
he  should  have  the  right  to  nominate,  on  his  own  responsibility, 
one  new  play  out  of  every  six,  or  to  produce  one  new  play  in 
every  season,  or  in  every  two  seasons,  without  consulting  his 
colleagues.  After  earnest  consideration,  we  regard  this  as 
inadvisable,  for  two  reasons.  In  the  first  place,  the  right,  when 
exercised,  would  show  the  Reading  Committee  divided  against 
itself;  whereas  it  should  be  a  point  of  honour  that  the  delibera- 
tions of  the  Committee  should  be  entirely  secret,  that  its  re- 
sponsibility should  be  undivided,  and  that  no  one  (except,  in 
case  of  necessity,  the  Trustees)  should  ever  know  who  voted 
for,  and  who  against,  a  particular  play.  Towards  the  out- 
side public,  the  Committee  should  present  an  appearance  of 
unanimity,  which  could  not  be  preserved  were  it  known  that 
one  of  its  members  had,  under  any  circumstances,  the  right  of 
disregarding  or  overruling  the  other  two.  In  the  second  place, 
we  believe  that  the  natural  preponderance  of  the  Director  in 
the  Committee  would  be  quite  sufficient  to  secure  all  the 
desirable  ends  to  which  the  proposed  additional  power  could 
be  applied.  To  put  it  briefly,  a  strong  Director  would  never 
require  to  use  the  power,  while  a  weak  Director  ought  not  to 
be  entrusted  with  it.  For  these  reasons  we  do  not  incorporate 
this  proposal  in  our  scheme,  but  put  it  on  record  as  a  possibility. 

The  Reading  Committee  would  probably  in  many  cases  call 
the  Business  Manager  into  consultation ;  but,  while  his  views 
might  naturally  influence  their  decision,  he  should  have  no  vote. 


i6 


NATIONAL  THEATRE 


We  suggest  that  the  salaries  of  the  General  Staff  should  be 
as  follows : — 


Salaries  of  General  Staff. 


The  Director  i        .         .         . 
The  Literary  Manager  ^ 
The  Business  Manager  ^ 
The  Solicitor 
The  Reading  Committee  Man 


Total 


1000 

looo 
3oo2 

300 

;^46oo 


•  Entitled  to  privileges  of  Pension  Fund. 

2  This  sum  is  a  mere  guess.  The  duties  of  the  other  members  of  the  General  Staff 
may  be  clearly  foreseen  and  their  value  estimated  ;  but  the  amount  of  work  that  would 
be  required  of  the  Solicitor  can  only  be  vaguely  conjectured. 


SECTION    III 

Actors  and  Actresses — Method  of  Selection — Payment  by  Salary  and  Fees — 
Convenience  of  Fee  System — Conditions  of  Engagement — Salary  List — 
Material  and  Artistic  Advantages  offered  by  the  Theatre  to  its  Company 
— Pension  Fund — Summary  of  Performers'  Salaries. 

In  estimating  the  number  of  actors  and  actresses  required,  the 
method  we  pursued  was  this  :  Having  before  us  as  complete  a 
list  as  possible  of  artists  of  known  qualifications,  we  selected 
from  it  a  provisional  company  of  those  whom  we  thought  desir- 
able and  probably  available  for  service  in  such  an  enterprise. 
Then  we  drew  up  a  provisional  repertory  of  plays,  and  proceeded 
to  cast  the  parts  in  them  from  our  provisional  company,  filling 
every  part  of  the  slightest  importance  with  an  actor  whom  we 
conceived  to  be  qualified  for  it,  and  leaving  only  the  very  small 
parts  to  be  filled  by  younger  actors  whom  it  was  needless  for  us 
to  individualise/  Where  we  found  an  actor  utilisable  in  one 
or  two  plays  of  our  repertory,  but  no  more,  we  struck  him  out 
and  substituted  for  him  an  actor  qualified  for  these  parts  and 
for  others  as  well.  Where  we  found  it  impossible  to  cast  a  part 
adequately  from  among  our  provisional  company,  we  added  a 
fresh  name  to  our  list,  sometimes  transferring  to  the  new-comer 
the  parts  previously  allotted  to  another  actor,  who  thus  had  to 
make  way  for  him  ;  but  in  other  cases  realising  that  we  needed 
him  to  fill  a  gap  in  our  company,  and  must  in  so  far  add  to  its 
number.  By  this  process  of  selection  and  exclusion  we  secured, 
as  we  trust,  the  survival  of  the  fittest.     It  is  to  be  noted  that  in  no 

1  They  are  designated  in  the  casts  (Appendix  D)  as  Mr.  A.,  Mr.  B.,  Miss  M., 
Miss  N.,  &c.,  &c. 

17  B 


i8  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

case  did  we  strike  out  a  play  from  our  repertory  because  of  a  diflB- 
culty  in  casting  it.  Feeling  that  our  company  ought  to  be  equal  to 
any  play  which  was  in  itself  suited  to  the  Theatre,  we  regai'ded 
the  difficulty  as  a  reason,  not  for  omitting  the  play,  but  for  altering 
or  adding  to  our  company.^  Then,  again,  we  had  to  make  sure, 
by  arranging  our  repertory  night  by  night,  that  we  were  not 
overworking  our  company,  but  might  rely  upon  their  being,  not 
only  artistically,  but  physically,  equal  to  the  tasks  we  imposed 
on  them.  To  this  end  we  drew  out  a  table  for  the  first  three 
months  of  the  season,  showing  at  a  glance  what  work  each 
actor  was  doing,  day  by  day  and  week  by  week.  Our  particular 
care  was  to  avoid  so  arranging  the  dates  of  new  productions  that 
the  actors  engaged  in  them  should  not  have  adequate  time  for 
rehearsal — to  avoid,  for  instance,  placing  two  new  productions 
in  consecutive  weeks,  in  both  of  which  heavy  parts  were  assigned 
to  the  same  actors.  These  considerations  involved  many,  not 
unlaborious,  readjustments,  now  of  casts,  and  again  of  the  order 
of  the  repertory.  But  having  gone  thus  minutely  into  the  first 
three  months  of  the  season,  we  did  not  think  it  necessarj'  to 
map  out  the  remaining  months  in  equal  detail.  It  is  possible 
that,  in  the  order  of  the  repertory  set  forth  for  these  latter 
months,  some  inconvenient  collocations  might,  on  close  scrutiny, 
be  found  to  occur.  But  we  have  assured  ourselves  that,  given 
the  company  we  have  selected,  or  a  company  equivalent  to  it, 
cautious  adjustment  can  always  obviate  such  difficulties.^ 

1  It  may  be  remarked  that  the  narrowness  of  opportunity  afforded  to  most  of  our 
popular  actors  under  the  present  system,  places  in  the  way  of  any  speculative  casting 
diificulties  which,  after  a  time,  would  be  cons-iderably  lessened  in  the  actual  working 
of  a  Repertory  Theatre. 

-  It  must  be  remembered,  too,  that,  within  reasonable  limits,  the  employment  of 
understudies  is  not  only  admissible  but  desirable,  by  way  of  giving  experience  to  the 
younger  members  of  the  company.     This  point  is  more  fully  discussed  on  p.  31. 


THE   COMPANY  19 

We  are  confident,  then,  that  the  forty-two  actors  and  twenty- 
four  actresses  of  om*  hypothetical  company  would  be  enough, 
yet  not  much  more  than  enough,  for  the  adequate  presentation 
of  the  repertory  we  have  sketched.^  Twelve  of  the  actors  and 
eight  of  the  actresses  we  assume  to  be  young  people  as  yet 
unknown.  The  others  (thirty  actors  and  eighteen  actresses) 
are  all  artists  of  established  reputation.  For  many  reasons,  we 
cannot  give  their  real  names :  mainly  because  we  have  no  right 
to  make  public  the  private  information  we  have  received  as  to 
their  probable  salaries.  We  have,  therefore,  given  them  fictitious 
names,  in  order  that  any  one  examining  the  scheme  may  be  able 
to  ascertain  the  nature  and  amount  of  the  work  we  require  of 
each  member  of  the  company.  It  is  not  in  the  least  essential 
to  estimating  the  merits  of  the  scheme  that  the  actual  identity 
of  any  of  the  artists  in  question  should  be  known.  It  might 
quite  well  happen  that,  if  the  Theatre  were  started  to-morrow, 
not  one  of  these  particular  actors  and  actresses  would  be  en- 
gaged. Not  one  of  them,  at  any  rate,  would  be  indispensable. 
We  could  supply  the  place  of  each  twice  over  at  least,  without 
going  beyond  the  list  of  known  and  probably  available  artists. 
The  names  we  have  given,  then,  may  be  taken  as  representing 
types  rather  than  individuals.  It  matters  not  what  particular 
actor  or  actress  we  had  in  mind  ;  he  (or  she)  merely  represents 
a  more  or  less  numerous  class  of  artists  capable  of  doing  approxi- 

1  The  Comedie-Fran^aise  in  1903  consisted  of  15  male  and  9  female  sociHaires, 
14  male  and  17  female  pensionnaires — 55  in  all,  as  against  our  66.  Probably  a  good 
many  performers  analogous  to  those  12  actors  and  8  actresses  whom  we  assume  to  be 
"  young  people  as  yet  imknown,"  are  reckoned  as  supernumeraries  at  the  Theatre- 
Fran^ais,  and  not  included  in  the  official  list.  It  is  also  to  be  noted  that  few  plays 
acted  at  the  Thiiatre-Fiaii^ais  require  such  large  casts  as  a  Shakespearean  tragedy  or 
history.  The  company  of  the  Vienna  Burgtheater  in  1902  appears  to  have  consisted 
of  about  44  actors  and  33  actresses ;  but  more  than  half  of  the  actresses  were  very 
rarely  employed. 


20  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

mately  the  same  work,  and  procurable  at  approximately  the  same 
remuneration. 

The  income  of  all  actors  and  actresses  regularly  attached  to 
the  Theatre  for  terms  of  not  less  than  three  years — as  distinct 
from  subordinate  and  probationary  performers  on  yearly  en- 
gagements —  would  consist  partly  of  a  fixed  annual  salary, 
partly  of  fees  paid  for  each  performance  in  which  he  or  she 
took  part.  This  system  of  feux,  as  it  is  called  at  the  Thdatre- 
Francais,  commends  itself  for  several  reasons.  It  is  almost 
universal  at  repertory  theatres  on  the  Continent ;  and  though 
it  is  more  or  less  unfamiliar  in  England,  we  were  confirmed  in 
our  intention  of  adopting  it  on  finding  that  an  English  expert 
whom  we  consulted — a  man  with  an  unrivalled  knowledge  of 
"the  profession" — instantly  declared  for  it  of  his  own  accord, 
without  any  prompting  from  us.  Under  this  system,  as  we 
apply  it,  an  actor's  contract  with  the  Theatre  would  secure  him 
a  certain  salary,  and  a  certain  guaranteed  number  of  perform- 
ances, at  a  given  fee  for  each  performance.  He  could  thus 
count  upon  a  minimum  income,  whether  he  actually  gave  so 
many  performances  or  not.  In  some  cases  the  actual  number 
of  performances  would  fall  below  the  guarantee ;  more  often  it 
would  rise  above  the  guarantee.  It  will  be  seen  that,  in  the 
season  actually  sketched,  twenty-two  of  the  actors  and  sixteen 
of  the  actresses  give  more  than  their  guaranteed  number  of  per- 
formances (in  some  cases  nearly  twice  as  many),  while  seven 
actors  and  two  actresses  give  fewer,  and  one  actor  gives  exactly 
the  guaranteed  number.  These  results — arrived  at  without  any 
"  cooking,"  for  we  decided  the  number  of  appearances  we  thought 
it  reasonable  to  guarantee  each  performer  before  ascertaining 
how  often  we  would  actually  employ  him  or  her — may  be  taken 
as  representing  pretty  fairly  the  probabilities  of  an  actual  season. 


FEE   SYSTEM  21 

The  chief  advantages  of  the  fee  system  may  be  briefly 
stated  as  follows  : — 

(i)  It  counteracts  the  tendency  to  "slackness"  which, 
human  nature  being  what  it  is,  occasionally  besets  any  worker 
who  finds  himself  in  a  secure  position,  in  which  his  earnings 
cannot  be  increased  by  zeal  or  diminished  by  perfunctoriness. 

(2)  It  enables  the  management  to  adjust  the  earnings  of 
a  performer  to  his  practical  usefulness  more  readily  than  by 
actual  alteration  of  his  salary.  The  rule  would  be  that  a 
salary,  once  attained,  should  not  be  reduced.  But  at  each 
renewal  of  engagement,  though  the  salary  might  of  course  be 
increased,  the  main  issue  between  the  management  and  the 
performer  would  be  the  regulation  of  the  amount  of  the  fee 
to  be  paid  and  the  number  of  performances  to  be  guaranteed. 
The  system,  in  fact,  provides  an  elastic  margin  of  great  con- 
venience. It  is  specially  desirable  to  meet  the  case  of 
performers  whose  usefulness  to  the  Theatre  may  for  a  time 
be  very  great,  but  is,  in  the  nature  of  things,  more  or  less 
transient.  Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  one  or  two  actresses  on 
our  list  earn  very  large  fees  in  proportion  to  their  salary,  which, 
indeed,  is  nearly  doubled  by  their  fee  income.  In  these  cases 
the  salary  may  be  taken  as  representing  the  permanent  value 
of  their  talent,  the  fees  as  representing  the  temporary  value 
of  their  personality.  When  their  existing  contract  expired, 
or  at  the  end  of  another  three  years'  term,  the  management 
might  possibly  reduce  the  number  of  guaranteed  performances. 
On  the  expiry  of  yet  another  term,  the  amount  of  fee  might 
have  to  be  reduced.  These  adjustments  would  probably  be  made 
with  much  less  friction  than  a  reduction  of  salary,  and  might, 
moreover,  meet  the  justice  of  the  case  with  greater  nicety. 

(3)  The  pension  due    to  an   actor  must   almost  inevitably 


22  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

be  regulated  by  the  salary  he  is  earning  at  the  time  when 
he  is  disabled  or  superannuated,  or  when  he  leaves  the  com- 
pany. If,  then,  there  is  no  fee  system,  and  a  decline  in  the 
performer's  value  to  the  Theatre  must  be  met  by  a  reduction 
in  his  or  her  salary,  cases  might  not  infrequently  arise  in 
which  a  performer  would  positively  suffer  a  diminution  of 
pension  by  remaining  a  member  of  the  company — the  extra 
percentage  earned  by  additional  years  of  service  being  cancelled, 
or  more  than  cancelled,  by  the  reduction  of  the  salary  on 
which  the  pension  was  to  be  calculated.  The  inconveniences  of 
such  a  system  will  be  apparent  to  any  one  who  reads  the  pen- 
sion regulations  (Appendix  B).  An  actress,  for  example,  who 
might  be  drawing  a  salary  of  ;^900  at  the  age  of  thirty,  would 
know  that  at  fifty  she  might  command  no  more  than  a  third 
of  that  sum.  The  result  would  be  that  the  moment  there  was 
a  question  of  reducing  her  salary  even  by  ;^50,  she  would 
leave  the  Theatre.  By  doing  so,  she  would  be  in  a  position 
to  claim,  at  the  superannuation  age  (fixed,  in  our  scheme,  at 
fifty-five  for  women),  at  least  20  per  cent,  of  ;i^900 ;  whereas, 
by  remaining  in  the  service  of  the  Theatre  till  she  reached 
the  superannuation  age,  she  might  find  her  claim  reduced  to 
something  like  60  per  cent,  of  ;^300 — that  is  to  say,  a 
pension  no  larger,  and  possibly  smaller,  than  that  which 
would  have  been  due  to  her  had  she  left  the  Theatre  between 
the  ages  of  thirty  and  thirty-five.  Such  a  system  would  be 
manifestly  absurd ;  and  still  more  impossible  would  it  be  to 
make  the  pension  of  a  performer  calculable,  not  on  the  salary 
he  was  last  earning,  but  on  the  highest  salary  he  had  ever 
earned.  All  these  difficulties  vanish  if  we  make  the  salary 
on  which  the  pension  is  to  be  calculated  a  stable  minimum 
of  value,  so  to  speak,  which  may  increase  but  cannot  diminish. 


FEE   SYSTEM 


23 


while  fluctuations  in  the  performer's  value  are  expressed  solely 
in  what  we  have  called  the  elastic  margin. 

(4)  Another  advantage  of  the  fee  system  is  that  it  places 
the  requisite  limitation  upon  the  Director's  theoretical  power 
to  cast  any  actor  for  any  part,  however  small.  It  is  some- 
times mentioned  as  one  of  the  great  merits  of  continental 
repertory  theatres  (and  especially  of  the  Meiningen  Company) 
that  the  leading  actors  are  required  on  occasion  to  take  the 
humblest  parts,  and  that  the  same  artist  may  be  found  play- 
ing Hamlet  to-night  and  a  footman  to-morrow.  If  this  were 
true,  it  would  be  a  very  foolish  and  even  inartistic  arrange- 
ment. At  the  National  Theatre  no  actor  should  be  engaged 
for  any  special  "  line  of  business,"  nor  should  any  actor  have 
the  right  to  refuse  a  part  assigned  him  by  the  Director ;  but 
the  fee  system  would  afford  a  sufficient  guarantee  that  the 
Director  would  not  wantonly  cast  any  artist  for  a  part  mani- 
festly below  his  or  her  talent  and  status.  It  would  be  sheer 
waste  to  make  an  actor  whose  fee  for  each  performance  was  £st, 
undertake  a  part  which  could  be  equally  well  filled  by  an 
actor  whose  fee  was  only  £\   ox  £\,   los. 

The  period  of  engagement  for  a  regular  member  of  the 
company  would  be  three  years,  renewable  in  similar  periods. 
Not  until  he  attains  a  three  years'  engagement  does  a  per- 
former begin  to  qualify  for  admission  to  the  privileges  of  the 
pension  fund.  One  of  the  difficulties  in  such  an  enterprise  is 
to  make  the  company  so  far  stable  as  to  ensure  their  playing 
together  to  the  best  advantage,  without  giving  any  one  such 
absolute  fixity  of  tenure  as  to  enable  him  to  decline  into  mere 
officialism  and  mechanical  routine.  This  end  is  probably  best 
attained  by  a  system  of  comparatively  short  engagements, 
qualified  by  a  traditional  understanding  that  the  policy  of  the 
Theatre  is  best  suited  by  permanence  of  service,  and  that  an 


24  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

actor  who  has  once  proved  his  value  and  established  his 
position,  will  not  be  parted  with  unless  it  be  for  good  and 
sufficient  reason.  On  the  other  hand,  as  a  certain  change  of 
employment  is  often  desirable  to  prevent  an  artist  from  getting 
into  a  rut  and  becoming  stale,  it  should  be  at  the  discretion 
of  the  Director  to  allow  a  performer  an  occasional  furlough 
for  a  definite  period,  so  that,  without  severing  his  connection 
with  the  Theatre,  or  forfeiting  any  advantage  of  pension  or 
seniority  accruing  from  continuity  of  service,  he  might  accept 
a  special  engagement  at  another  theatre.  It  would  not  be 
desirable  that  an  actor,  in  joining  the  Theatre  with  the  inten- 
tion of  devoting  his  life  to  it,  should  feel  himself  for  ever 
debarred  from  playing  a  part  outside  it,  however  peculiarly  it 
might  be  adapted  to  his  talents.  Loyalty  is  best  secured  by  a 
sense  of  reasonable  freedom.  Moreover,  the  National  Theatre 
should  try  to  live  on  good  terms  with  the  private  theatres 
around  it,  and  the  Director  should  be  free,  on  fitting  occasion, 
to  do  a  brother  manager  a  courtesy. 

The  following  tables  show  at  a  glance  the  remuneration 
allotted  in  our  budget  to  the  actors  and  actresses  of  the  com- 
pany. Opposite  the  name  of  each  performer  will  be  found  (i) 
his  or  her  fixed  salary  ;  (2)  the  amount  of  the  fee  payable  for 
each  performance ;  (3)  the  number  of  performances  guaranteed 
by  contract ;  (4)  the  total  income  thus  guaranteed  to  the 
performer;  (5)  the  number  of  performances  actually  given  by 
him  or  her  in  our  specimen  season ;  (6)  the  total  income 
actually  earned  by  the  performer  in  the  season  in  question. 
It  may  be  noted  that  the  incomes  at  the  upper  end  of  the  scale 
might  in  practice  be  slightly  reduced,  while  those  lower  down 
might  be  slightly  augmented,  by  the  fact  that  a  leading  per- 
former might  now  and  then  have  to  give  up  a  part  for  a  few 
nights  to  an  understudy.^ 

•  See  footnote,  p.  31. 


SALARIES 


25 


SALARIES 

ACTORS 


so 

1 

a  S 

Income 

0 
_-.   C 

Actual 

Salary. 

Fee. 

li 

Guaranteed. 

Is 

Income. 

(?0 

^1 

£ 

£     s. 

£ 

s. 

£ 

s. 

Mr.  Kingsway  . 

900 

5     0 

75 

1275 

0 

100 

1400 

0 

Mr.  Aldwych    . 

800 

5     0 

75 

1175 

0 

75 

1175 

0 

Mr.  Langham   . 

700 

5     ° 

75 

1075 

0 

83 

1115 

0 

Mr.  Mark  T,a,ne 

500 

3     ° 

100 

800 

0 

138 

914 

0 

Mr.  Ludgate     . 

500 

I     0 

100 

600 

0 

149 

649 

0 

Mr.  Wimpole    . 

400 

I     0 

100 

500 

0 

123 

523 

0 

Iklr.  Fenchurch. 

400 

I    10 

100 

55° 

0 

no 

565 

0 

Mr.  Barbican    . 

400 

I    10 

75 

512 

10 

74 

512 

10 

]Mr.  Bryanston . 

400 

I    10 

75 

512 

10 

100 

55° 

0 

Mr.  Holborn     . 

400 

I    10 

75 

512 

10 

74 

512 

10 

Mr.  Somerset  House 

400 

I     0 

75 

475 

0 

116 

516 

0 

Mr.  PaUmall     . 

300 

I     0 

100 

400 

0 

156 

456 

0 

Mr.  Tower  Hill 

300 

I     0 

100 

400 

0 

170 

470 

0 

Mr.  Savile  Rowe 

300 

I    10 

100 

450 

0 

112 

468 

0 

Mr.  Gracechurch 

300 

I    10 

75 

412 

10 

lOI 

451 

10 

Mr.  Clement  Dane    . 

300 

I     0 

100 

400 

0 

72 

400 

0 

Mr.  Throgmorton 

300 

I     0 

100 

400 

0 

118 

41S 

0 

Mr.  Hyde  Park 

300 

I    10 

100 

450 

0 

130 

495 

0 

'Mr.  Cornhill      . 

300 

I     0 

100 

400 

0 

82 

400 

0 

Mr.  White  Hall 

300 

I     0 

100 

400 

0 

91 

400 

0 

Mr.  Bethnal  Green  . 

300 

I     0 

100 

400 

0 

131 

431 

0 

Mr.  Smithfield 

300 

I     0 

100 

400 

0 

97 

400 

0 

Mr.  Knightsbridge    . 

250 

0  10 

100 

300 

0 

140 

320 

0 

Mr.  Temple  Barre     . 

250 

0  10 

100 

300 

0 

106 

303 

0 

Mr.  Farringdon 

250 

0   10 

100 

300 

0 

118 

309 

0 

Mr.  Paternoster 

250 

0   10 

100 

300 

0 

96 

300 

0 

Mr.  Lothbury    . 

250 

0   10 

100 

300 

0 

131 

315 

10 

Mr.  Finsbury    . 

250 

0   10 

ICO 

300 

0 

169 

334 

10 

ilr.  Longacre    . 

250 

0   10 

100 

300 

0 

127 

313 

10 

Mr.  Euston 

250 
Totj 

0   10 
il 

100 

300 

0 

126 

313 

0 

(^14,900 

0 

ii5.73° 

0 

Actors  who  receive  n( 

) fees : — 

Messrs.  A.,  B.,  C, 

D.,  (4)  a 

t  ;^2So  a 

year 

,         , 

• 

;^I,000 

0 

Messrs.  E.,  F.,  G., 

H.,  (4)  a 

t  ;^2oo  a 

yeai- 

. 

, 

Soo 

c 

Messrs.  I.,  J.,  K.,  '. 

L.,  (4)  a1 
Tote 

il  of  Men' 

year 

s  Sali 

iries  and  Fee 

s      ;< 

600 

0 

^18,130 

0 

26 


NATIONAL   THEATRE 


ACTRESSES 


M   . 

X 

1 

11 

Income 

c 

Actual 

Salary. 

Fee. 

s  s 

■2  - 

Guaranteed. 

Income. 

r.  3 

£ 

£ 

5. 

£ 

£ 

s. 

Miss  Elcho 

700 

S 

0 

75 

1075 

91 

"55 

0 

Miss  Belvoir     . 

600 

s 

0 

75 

975 

72 

975 

0 

Miss  Mentmore 

500 

3 

0 

75 

725 

106 

818 

0 

Mrs.  Penshurst 

400 

I 

0 

75 

475 

89 

489 

0 

Miss  Knole 

400 

I 

0 

75 

475 

78 

478 

0 

Mrs.  Dalmeny  . 

400 

I 

0 

50 

45° 

41 

45° 

0 

Miss  Inveraray. 

300 

I 

0 

50 

35° 

57 

357 

0 

Miss  Tintagel   . 

300 

3 

0 

50 

45° 

94 

582 

0 

Miss  Walmer    . 

300 

2 

0 

50 

400 

99 

498 

0 

Miss  Blenheim . 

250 

3 

0 

50 

400 

82 

496 

0 

Miss  Longleat  . 

250 

0 

5° 

300 

94 

344 

0 

Miss  Haddon  Hall    . 

250 

10 

50 

325 

87 

380 

10 

Miss  Ai'undel    . 

250 

0 

50 

300 

86 

336 

0 

Miss  Carnarvon 

250 

0 

5° 

300 

52 

352 

0 

Mrs.  Pevensey 

250 

0 

5° 

300 

64 

314 

0 

Miss  Alnwick   . 

200 

0 

5° 

250 

81 

281 

0 

Miss  Chatsworth 

200 

0 

5° 

250 

70 

270 

0 

Miss  Hatfield    . 

200 
Tofcd 

0 

5° 

250 

72 

272 

0 

;£8o5o 

;^8847 

10 

Actresses  who  receive 

no  fees 

; 

Misses  M.,  N.,  0., 

(3)  at  ^ 

"200 

a  yea 

r  . 

•                  ■ 

, 

600 

0 

Misses  P.,  Q.,  R.,  ( 

3)at;^ 
Total 

150  a  year 
of  Ladies 

'Sal. 

iries  and  Fee 

3 

45° 

0 

;^9897 

10 

The  question  now  arises  :  Have  we  formed  a  fairly  correct 
estimate  of  the  income  (salary  plus  fees)  which  would  be  de- 
manded by  the  actors  we  have  in  view,  or  their  equivalents  ?  As 
the  remuneration  of  the  performers  is  necessarily  the  largest 
item  in  a  theatrical  budget,  the  practical  merits  of  our  scheme 
must  in  great  measure  depend  on  the  answer  to  this  question. 

We  have,  of  course,  founded  our  estimate  on  the  best  infor- 


ACTORS'    SALARIES  27 

mation  available  to  us  as  to  the  actual  earnings  at  the  present 
moment  of  the  artists  in  question.  Their  earnings,  not  their 
nominal  weekly  salary  ;  that  is  a  totally  different  matter.  An 
actor's  income-tax  return,  based  on  an  average  of  three  years,  is 
in  the  majority  of  cases  not  at  all  what  the  outside  public  is  apt 
to  imagine  on  learning  that  Mr.  So-and-So's  salary  is  such-and- 
such  an  imposing  sum  per  week.  To  reduce  this  statement  to 
its  true  proportions,  we  should  have  to  learn  how  many  weeks 
in  the  year  Mr.  So-and-So  is  on  an  average  employed.  The 
economic  account  of  the  matter  seems  to  be  this  :  On  the  one 
hand,  the  profession  is  greatly  overcrowded,  so  that  there  ai"e 
always  far  more  nominally  qualified  actors  wanting  parts  than 
there  are  parts  to  be  filled.  This  would,  in  the  case  of  an  ordi- 
nary' employment,  bring  wages  to  the  lowest  subsistence  level 
for  a  man  of  the  class  required.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  a 
manager  is  not  like  an  ordinary  employer  who  "  takes  on " 
without  selection  any  "  hands "  who  have  attained  a  certain 
standard  of  skill.  On  the  contrary,  he  selects  very  carefully  the 
actor  whom,  of  all  those  available,  he  considers  best  fitted  for  a 
particular  part ;  and  in  relation  to  that  particular  part,  the  actor 
comes  to  have  something  like  a  monopoly  value.  He  can  de- 
mand any  salary  that  is  not  so  extravagant  as  to  make  the  next- 
best  man  seem  preferable.  But  when  once  he  has  played  this 
part,  months  or  years  may  elapse  before  another  presents  itself, 
for  which  his  physical  or  mental  characteristics  give  him  this 
monopoly  value ;  and  if  he  has  not  a  monopoly  value,  his 
competition  value  is  very  small  indeed,  and  he  may  find  "  no 
buyers "  even  at  a  miserably  low  figure.  The  employments  in 
a  theatre  which  can  be  filled,  like  a  place  at  a  power-loom, 
by  any  one  who  has  served  a  mechanical  apprenticeship,  are, 
in  fact,  filled  by  "  hands "  (so  to  speak)  at  that  lowest  sub- 


28  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

sistence  wage  which  is  regulated  by  the  pressure  of  applicants 
for  any  post  in  a  theatre,  however  insignificant.^  These  are  the 
actors  who  are  never  heard  of.  The  actors  who  command  any 
considerable  weekly  salary,  command  it  on  account  of  their 
special  fitness  for  a  particular  part ;  and,  as  a  general  rule,  the 
parts  for  which  they  are  specially  fit  present  themselves  so  rarely, 
that  an  actor's  earnings  during  a  run  of  two  or  three  months  will 
often  represent  his  whole  income  for  a  year  or  more.  Even  when 
an  artist  has  risen  to  the  level  of  reputation  at  which  his  mere 
name  in  the  bill  is  of  considerable  value,  apart  from  his  special 
fitness  for  a  given  part,  he  is  by  no  means  sure  of  continuous 
engagements.  Actors  of  great  personal  popularity  will  fre- 
quently drop  out  of  work  for  months  at  a  time  without  any 
assignable  reason.  An  actor's  vogue  among  the  managers  (as 
distinct  from  the  public)  is  subject  to  a  sort  of  mysterious  perio- 
dicity. That  is  one  of  the  main  reasons  why  so  many  are  eager 
to  "  go  into  management"  for  themselves. 

Our  first  business,  then,  was  to  estimate  the  average  income, 
over  a  period  of  from  three  to  five  years,  actually  earned  by  any 
artist  whom  we  wished  to  include  in  our  company.  In  some 
cases,  at  the  lower  end  of  our  list,  this  income  would  be  so  small 
that  the  sum  we  felt  it  right  to  allot  would  probably  represent 
an  increase  rather  than  a  diminution  of  the  actor's  total  earn- 
ings, even  apart  from  the  further  advantages  offered  him. 
About  the  middle  of  the  list,  some  of  the  incomes  we  allot  are 
probably  very  much  the  same  as  the  average  incomes  actually 
earned  by  the  performers  in  question.     But  if  we  have  levelled 

'  Even  the  "  subsistence  wage "  can  be,  and  often  is,  lowered  by  the  fact  that  the 
"  blackleg  "  is  so  prominent  in  the  economy  of  a  certain  class  of  management — the  man 
or  woman  who  has  other  means  of  livelihood,  and  is  willing  to  appear  on  the  stage 
for  derisory  sums,  or  for  nothing,  or  even  to  pay  for  the  privilege. 


FIXITY   OF  TENURE  29 

up  at  the  lower  end  of  the  list,  we  have  on  the  whole  levelled 
down  at  the  middle  and  upper  end,  and  that  for  three  reasons — 
first,  on  account  of  the  permanence  of  employment  offered ; 
second,  on  account  of  its  more  dignified  and  agreeable  condi- 
tions ;  third,  on  account  of  the  participation  in  the  pension 
fund,  secured  after  ten  years'  service.  Let  us  consider  these 
three  points  in  their  order. 

The  first  has  already  been  dealt  with  in  the  paragraph  re- 
ferring to  conditions  of  engagement.  Very  few  actors  under 
the  present  system  have  their  position  ensured  for  even  the  three 
years  which  would,  in  this  Theatre,  be  the  minimum  term  for 
every  performer  who  had  passed  the  probationary  stage.  It  is 
seldom  that  an  actor  can  see  his  way  ahead  beyond  "the  run  of 
the  piece  "  in  which  he  is  engaged.^  He  may  be  pretty  confi- 
dent of  soon  finding  another  engagement ;  but  confidence  is  not 
the  same  thing  as  certainty.  Moreover,  as  above  stated,  the 
majority  of  actors  find  their  demand  with  managers  run  in 
longer  or  shorter  cycles.  At  one  time  they  will  have  to  refuse 
offers  which  come  pouring  in  upon  them ;  at  another  time,  for 
no  apparent  reason,  and  without  any  change  in  their  status  with 
the  public,  the  managers  will  seem  to  have  forgotten  their  exist- 
ence. In  the  main,  stage  employment  belongs  to  that  least 
satisfactory  and  most  unwholesome  class — casual  labour.  That 
many  actors — indeed,  all  actors  of  a  type  desirable  at  such  a 
theatre  as  this — will  make  considerable  sacrifices  to  escape  from 
this  precarious  and  demoralising  condition,  is  not  for  a  moment 
doubtful.  Even  a  three  years'  engagement  would,  to  the  mass 
of  the  profession,  mean  comparative  fixity  of  tenure  ;  while,  as 

'  It  shovdd  be  noted,  however,  that  within  the  past  few  years  it  has  become  more 
and  more  the  practice  of  some  managers  to  give  the  leading  members  of  their  company 
yearly  engagements. 


30  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

above  stated,  the  rule  should  be  that,  in  the  absence  of  some 
definite  reason  to  the  contrary,  the  actor  might  expect  to  remain 
for  much  longer  terms,  or  even  to  the  end  of  his  career,  in  the 
service  of  the  Theatre.  At  the  same  time  it  must  be  noted 
that  a  "definite  reason  to  the  contrary"  would  not  alvpays 
imply  misconduct  or  even  slackness  on  the  actor's  part.  The 
need  for  bringing  "  new  blood "  into  the  company  would  now 
and  then  involve  dispensing  with  the  services  of  an  actor 
against  whom  nothing  could  be  alleged  save  that  his  place 
might  be  better  filled  by  another  man.  But  if  the  Theatre 
were  sufficiently  prosperous  to  permit  of  the  maintenance  of  a 
company  somewhat  larger  than  strict  necessity  demanded,  the 
bringing  in  of  "new  blood"  would  not  always  imply  the 
supplanting  of  older  talents,  but  might  merely  involve  some 
reduction  in  the  fee-income  of  an  actor  who  would  have 
to  share  his  parts  with  a  younger  recruit.  The  system  of 
furloughs,  judiciously  applied,  would  also  help  to  keep  the 
company  large  and  representative,  yet  not  overgrown. 

In  the  second  place,  even  apart  from  its  greater  security,  the 
actor's  position  would  be  much  more  agreeable,  both  socially 
and  artistically,  than  it  is  apt  to  be  under  the  present  system. 
He  would  be  able  to  settle  down  among  his  household  gods — 
an  advantage  more  appreciated  than  some  people  might  imagine 
among  actors  of  the  present  day.  He  would  not  be  liable  at 
any  moment  to  finding  himself  compelled,  lest  worse  befall  him, 
to  accept  a  provincial,  American,  or  colonial  engagement,  and 
"hve  in  his  boxes"  for  months  or  years.  The  charms  of  a 
nomadic  existence  soon  pall  on  the  actor,  and  there  are  few  who 
would  not  stretch  a  good  many  points  for  the  sake  of  an  assured 
position  in  London,  even  apart  from  any  prestige  that  might 
eventually   attach   to   association   with   the   National   Theatre. 


CONDITIONS   OF  WORK  31 

The  conditions  of  work,  too,  would  be  far  more  agreeable  than 
they  generally  are  at  present.  Rehearsals,  indeed,  would  be 
numerous,  but  being  always  conducted  in  a  Theatre  which  was, 
so  to  speak,  the  actor's  second  home,  the  inconvenience  and 
fatigue  attaching  to  them  would  be  minimised.  And  if  re- 
hearsals occupied  a  good  many  of  his  days,  performances,  on 
the  other  hand,  would  not  occupy  all  his  evenings.  He  would 
not  feel  himself  a  slave  every  night  of  his  life  from  seven  o'clock 
to  midnight.  The  actors  in  most  frequent  employment — 
who  would  be  those  playing  the  minor  and  less  fatiguing  parts 
— would  have  two  or  three  free  evenings  in  every  week  ;  while 
actors  playing  leading  parts  would  seldom  have  to  give  more 
than  four  performances  a  week,  and  often  not  so  many.^  Even 
supposing  that  a  performer  appears  five  times  in  a  week,  the 
difference  between  five  performances  and  the  eight  "  shows " 
which  he  is  now  expected  to  give  in  a  successful  play  means 
the  difference  between  pleasant  artistic  activity  and  monotonous 
mechanical  toil.  Taking  the  company  all  round,  it  would 
be  seldom  indeed  that  an  actor  or  actress  would  not  have  three 

1  It  may  here  be  pointed  out  that  understudying  in  this  Theatre  will  be  neither  so 
perfunctory  nor  so  thankless  a  task  as  it  generally  is  in  the  existing  state  of  things.  It 
will  not,  as  at  present,  be  illness  or  accident  alone  that  gives  an  understudy  a  chance  of 
proving  his  quality.  The  conduct  of  the  Theatre  will  often  render  it  impossible  to 
retain  complete  an  original  cast  for  every  performance  of  a  play.  If  an  actor  is  rehears- 
ing a  great  new  part — Hamlet,  for  example — he  may  be  compelled  to  spare  his  strength 
for  the  first  night  by  giving  up  to  his  understudy  his  part  in  any  play  which  may  be 
announced  for  performance  on  one  of  the  two  or  three  nights  immediately  preceding 
that  fixed  for  the  new  production.  The  Director  would  have  the  right  to  insist  on  his 
doing  so  if  the  service  of  the  Theatre  seemed  to  demand  it.  Again,  if  an  actor  were 
playing  a  heavy  part  in  a  very  successful  production  which  was  repeated  four  times  a 
week,  some  of  his  parts  in  the  other  plays  presented  during  the  same  weeks  would,  no 
doubt,  fall  to  his  understudies.  Indeed,  if  an  understudy  should  show  marked  ability 
in  a  part  at  the  one  full  understudy  rehearsal  which  each  play  will  receive,  the  Direc- 
tor would  make  a  point  of  finding  an  opportunity  or  opportunities  for  him  to  play  it 
in  public.  The  wise  Director  will  always  be  looking  among  his  rank  and  file  for  the 
leaders,  and  the  ripe  and  accomplished  talents,  of  the  future. 


32  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

evenings  in  the  week  (including  Sunday)  free  for  study,  recrea- 
tion, or  social  life.  It  would  be  in  every  way  good  for  the  actor 
to  be  enabled  to  enlarge  the  circle  of  his  social  relations,  and 
escape  from  the  constant  companionship  of  those  of  his  own 
calling. 

The  artistic  advantage  to  the  actor  arising  from  variety  of 
employment  is  generally  admitted,  yet  not  fully  realised. 
Beyond  all  doubt,  the  supersession  of  the  old  stock  company 
by  the  long  run  system  has  done  a  veiy  real  service  to  the 
stage.  It  has  encouraged  a  finish,  both  in  play-writing  and 
acting,  which  the  older  conditions  never  allowed.  It  has 
broken  a  tradition  of  slovenliness.  But  the  system — or  rather 
its  exclusive  prevalence — is  now  over-reaching  itself.  The  old 
system,  under  which  the  physical  fitness  or  unfitness  of  an 
actor  for  a  part  was  apt  to  be  entirely  ignored,  has  been 
replaced  by  a  new  system  under  which  physical  fitness  is 
regarded  as  the  one  thing  needful.  Under  the  old  system 
talent  and  skill  were  expected  to  work  impossibilities ;  under 
the  new  system  little  is  left  for  them  to  do.  An  author  who 
wants  to  cast  a  part,  ransacks  London  and  the  provinces  for 
a  man  or  woman  who  can  "  look "  it,  and  trusts  to  his  own 
or  the  producer's  coaching  to  supply  the  place  of  talent  and 
skill.  As  there  are  no  fixed  companies  and  only  a  few  long 
engagements,  his  freedom  of  choice  is  almost  unlimited ;  yet 
authors  complain  (quite  justly)  that,  with  the  whole  "  profes- 
sion "  at  their  command,  it  is  frequently  impossible  to  get 
important  characters  in  their  works  even  moderately  well 
played.  What  is  the  reason  ?  Simply  that  the  absolute 
tiuidity  of  the  theatrical  world,  enabling  an  actor  to  appear 
always  in  parts  which  he  can  get  through  on  the  strength  of 
his  mere  personality,  leads  to  the  atrophy  of  whatever  talent 


PENSION    FUND  33 

he  may  possess.  Being  cast  only  for  parts  for  which  his 
personality  is  obviously  suited,  he  is  tied  down  to  one  line 
of  work,  never  attains  any  suppleness  or  versatility,  and  at 
last  becomes  stale  and  uninteresting,  even  in  the  parts  to 
which  he  is  so  closely  confined.  Constant  mechanical  repeti- 
tion of  one  type  of  character  hardens  his  peculiarities  into 
mannerisms.  Even  if  his  performance  of  a  part  be  not 
mechanical  from  the  outset,  the  intolerable  monotony  involved 
in  seven  or  eight  repetitions  a  week  soon  grinds  all  spontaneity 
out  of  it ;  and  it  is  not  only  his  performance  of  that  part  that 
suffers,  but  his  capability  for  others. 

The  fluidity  of  the  theatrical  world,  besides  checking  the 
development  of  the  individual  actor,  impairs,  in  the  majority 
of  productions,  the  harmony  of  the  general  effect.  It  pre- 
vents the  formation  of  any  of  those  artistic  homes  where  the 
members  of  the  family  are  in  habitual  sympathy  one  with 
another.  A  permanent  company,  formed,  so  to  speak,  by 
natural  selection  and  the  survival  of  the  fittest,  used  to  each 
other's  methods,  and  working  in  harmony,  may  be  trusted  to 
give  a  far  sounder  performance  of  any  play  than  the  most 
brilliant  "scratch"  company  that  can  be  got  together. 

Finally,    the    advantages    of  the    Pension   Fund,    with    the 

provision  it  assures  in  case  of  disablement  or  superannuation, 

cannot  but  appeal  to  the  better  class  of  actor.    A  suggested 

pension  scheme  will  be  found  in  Appendix  B,  p.  135.      It  is, 

necessarily,  too  complex  to  be  summarised  with  any  advantage, 

but  not,  we  hope,  to  be  understood  by  any  one  who  will  read 

its    articles    carefully.      Whether    it   is    so    devised    as    to    be 

practicable    and    attractive    is    not  for   us    to  determine.      We 

have  not  the  least  doubt,  at  any  rate,  that  a  practicable  scheme 

can  be  devised  ;  and  we  have  the  best  authority  for  believing 

c 


34  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

that  the  advantages  of  a  pension  fund  would  be  keenly  appre- 
ciated by  the  class  of  actors  whom  the  Theatre  would  seek 
to  attract. 

We  have  every  confidence,  then,  that  the  services  of  those 
actors  of  whom  our  hypothetical  company  is  composed,  or  of 
their  equivalents,  could  be  secured  for  approximately  the  sums 
we  have  allotted  to  them.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  such  an 
institution  cannot  hope,  and  does  not  desire,  to  keep  within 
its  limits  the  born  "  star,"  the  man  or  woman  who  is  obviously 
capable  of  attaining  world-wide  renown  or  notoriety.  Rachel, 
though  no  doubt  the  glory  of  the  Com^die  Franjaise,  came 
very  near  being  its  ruin  ;  and  it  was  fated  that  Sarah  Bern- 
hardt and  Coquelin  should  fly  off  from  that  organisation  as 
soon  as  they  fully  realised  the  value,  in  sovereigns,  dollars, 
marks,  and  roubles,  of  their  personality  and  talent.  We  do 
not  pretend  that  our  company  contains  a  Sarah  Bernhardt 
or  a  Coquelin ;  nor,  if  one  of  its  members  developed  any 
such  conspicuous  virtuosity,  should  we  expect  him  or  her  to 
remain  within  the  bounds  of  the  institution.  But  it  is  quite 
possible  to  possess  distinguished  talent,  and  even  genius, 
without  the  power,  or  the  wish,  to  set  the  world  on  fire.  It 
should  be  noticed  that  some  of  the  class  of  actors  who  now 
are,  or  aspire  to  be,  actor-managers,  would,  if  such  a  theatre 
existed,  be  quite  content  with  the  career  it  offered  them.  The 
craving  to  become  an  actor-manager  is,  in  many  cases,  not 
prompted  by  any  overweening  ambition,  but  by  the  necessity 
for  escaping  from  the  predominance  of  other  actor-managers. 

The  lower  ranks  of  the  company  would  be  filled  by  young 
probationers  (those  designated  in  our  salary-lists  and  casts  by 
initials  only),  who  would  be  engaged  for  not  more  and  not 
less  than  a  season  at  a  time,  and  would  be  remunerated  by 


SUMMARY   OF   SALARIES  35 

Balaries  alone,  without  fees.  They  would  fill  the  small  parts 
in  plays  requiring  a  very  large  cast,  would  understudy,  and, 
in  exceptional  cases,  would  play  what  may  be  called  mute 
character-parts — the  leading  figures  in  a  mob,  &c.,  &c. 

For  populace,  armies,  &c.,  a  certain  number  of  professional 
"supers"  would  have  to  be  employed.  An  estimate  under 
this  head  will  be  found  below.  For  what  are  technically 
known  as  "extra  gentlemen  and  ladies" — courtiers,  &c.,  in 
classical  plays,  guests  and  background-figures  who  "walk  on" 
in  modem  plays — the  management  ought  to  be  able  to  rely 
upon  the  pupils  of  the  Training  School  which  would  be  attached 
to  the  Theatre.  It  would,  indeed,  be  one  of  the  chief  advan- 
tages this  school  could  offer  its  pupils,  that  they  would  be 
admitted  to  some,  at  any  rate,  of  the  rehearsals  of  the  Theatre, 
and  by  appearing  in  supernumerary  parts,  would  be  enabled 
to  acquire  the  habit  of  the  scene.  The  question  of  the  Train- 
ing School  is  further  discussed  in  Section  X. 

Summary  of  Salaries  Payable  to  Performers. 

Thirty  actors  on  three-years'  engagements 
(salaries  and  fees)  ^      .         .         .         .         . 

Twelve  actors  on  short  engagements,  who  do 
not  receive  fees  ..... 

Eighteen  actresses  on  three-years'  engage- 
ments (salaries  and  fees)  ^    . 

Six  actresses  on  short  engagements,  who  do 
not  receive  fees  ...... 

Supermaster  and  Supernumeraries  (including 
payment  for  rehearsals)  ^     .         ... 


'  Entitled  to  privileges  of  Pension  Fund. 

'  It  is  assumed  that  the  pupils  of  the  Training  School  would  serve  without  salary 
as  extra  ladies  and  gentlemen. 


;^i5.73o 

0 

0 

2,400 

0 

0 

8,847 

10 

0 

1,050 

0 

0 

750 

0 

0 

28.777 

10 

0 

SECTION   IV 

Repertory  for  a  Specimen  Season — The  Theatre  not  a  Pioneer  Theatre — 
Principles  of  Selection — Shakespeare — Elizabethan  Drama — Restoration 
Comedy — Eighteenth-Century  Comedy — Early  Victorian  and  Mid-Vic- 
torian Plays — Modern  Revivals — New  Plays — Foreign  Plays,  Classical 
and  Modern — Schedule  of  Repertory. 

A  FEW  words  must  be  said  as  to  the  composition  of  the  reper- 
tory for  our  specimen  season.  And  here,  at  the  outset,  there 
is  a  misconception  to  be  guarded  against. 

It  is  not  an  "  Advanced  "  Theatre  that  we  are  design- 
ing. The  great  subsidised  theatres  of  the  Continent  are  not 
"advanced"  theatres.  It  is  not  their  business  to  be  far  ahead 
of  the  time,  but  to  be  well  abreast  of  it.  Sometimes,  no  doubt 
(as  in  the  case  of  the  Berlin  Schauspielhaus),  they  fail  even  in 
that  duty ;  but,  as  a  rule,  they  perform  it  reasonably  well.  They 
follow,  more  or  less  cautiously,  more  or  less  eclectically,  in  the 
wake  of  the  "  advanced  "  theatres ;  and  that  is  as  it  should  be. 
Outposts  are  necessary  to  the  army  of  progress  ;  but  no  army 
can  be  all  outposts ;  and  where  the  main  body  is  out  of  touch 
with  its  pioneers,  they  pioneer  in  vain.  The  Theatre  we  have 
here  in  view  forms  part,  and  an  indispensable  part,  of  the  main 
army  of  progress.  It  will  neither  compete  with  the  outpost 
theatres  nor  relieve  them  of  their  functions.  It  is  the  business 
of  the  outposts  to  press  on,  to  try  this  path  and  that,  sometimes 
to  blunder,  and  find  themselves  in  an  untenable  position,  or  in 
a  "  No  Thoroughfare."  The  main  body,  profiting  by  their  ex- 
perience, tries  to  avoid  their  errors ;  and  through  this  division 

36 


REPERTORY  37 

of  labour  the  general  advance  goes  on  steadily  and  securely, 
with  no  risk  of  a  serious  set-back.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
the  extraordinary  headway  which  the  German  drama  has  made 
during  the  past  fifteen  years  is  due  to  the  influence  of  the 
pioneer  theatres  in  clearing  the  way  for  the  main  body ;  but  it 
is  the  advance  of  the  main  body  that  gives  the  outpost  work  its 
national,  and  even  European,  significance.  The  work  of  our 
English  pioneer  theatres,  often  admirable  in  itself,  has  been 
in  great  measure  robbed  of  its  significance  by  the  fact  that  they 
have  scarcely  ever  been  in  touch  with  the  main  army.  The 
National  Theatre  would  keep  a  sympathetic  eye  upon  the  work 
of  the  outpost  theatres,  and  would  itself  experiment  in  due 
measure.  A  wise  management  would  show  its  wisdom  mainly, 
perhaps,  in  knowing  when  to  experiment  and  when  to  hold  its 
hand.  But  experiment  would  not  be  its  primary  function.  Its 
aim  would  be  to  recruit  and  foster  an  intelligent,  not  neces- 
sarily an  "  advanced,"  public.  But  intelligent  members  of  the 
"  advanced "  public  would  find  plenty  to  interest  them  in  its 
workings. 

This  distinction  between  the  National  Theatre  and  the 
pioneer  theatre  it  seemed  well  to  emphasise  at  the  outset,  as 
any  failure  to  realise  it  could  only  lead  to  misunderstanding 
and  disappointment. 

The  main  principles  we  had  in  view,  in  sketching  our  speci- 
men repertor}',  were  that  it  should  be  national,  representative, 
and  popular. 

The  national  note  we  struck  at  the  very  outset  in  presenting, 
in  chronological  sequence,  the  central  and  most  continuous  portion 
of  Shakespeare's  great  epic  of  English  history,  as  it  has  justly 
been  called.  To  attempt  the  production  in  one  week  of  four  of 
the  most  exacting  plays   of  the  world's  literature — plays  with 


38  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

exceptionally  heavy  casts  and  exceptional  requirements  in  the 
way  of  scenery  and  costumes — was  clearly  to  put  a  great  strain 
on  the  resources  of  the  Theatre.  We  assumed,  however,  that 
there  would  be  ample  time  for  preparation  (much  more,  of 
course,  than  there  would  be,  under  ordinary  circumstances,  be- 
tween one  season  and  another) ;  and  we  felt  that  the  importance 
of  the  occasion  should  be  marked,  not  by  one  big  production,  in 
which  the  National  Theatre  could  not  hope  to  compete  with 
private  theatres  in  scenic  attraction,  but  by  a  sustained  artistic 
effort  on  a  great  scale,  such  as  no  private  theatre  could  reason- 
ably attempt.  We  felt,  too,  that,  in  opening  with  a  single 
Shakespearean  production,  the  management  might  not  un- 
naturally be  tempted  to  aim  at  a  degree  of  scenic  luxury — as 
opposed  to  appropriateness — inconsistent  with  the  idea  of  the 
Theatre ;  whereas  the  very  magnitude  of  the  effort  demanded 
in  presenting  a  cycle  of  four  plays,  would  render  almost  impera- 
tive from  the  first  the  observance  of  a  just  standard  of  dignified 
moderation.  The  cycle  would,  therefore,  be  as  characteristic  in 
a  technical  sense  as  in  a  literary  sense  it  would  be  appropriate. 

Our  other  Shakespearean  productions  we  selected  on  the 
following  grounds :  The  Tempest  as  a  beautiful  poem,  much 
neglected  of  late  years ;  The  Taming  of  the  Shrew  as  a  popular 
farce,  showing  the  more  prosaic  and  commonplace  side  of  the 
poet's  genius ;  and  Romeo  and  Juliet,  Hamlet,  and  As  You  Like 
It,  simply  as  immortal  masterpieces  which  no  English  theatre 
can  make  too  great  haste  to  establish  in  its  repertory.  The 
number  of  Shakespearean  productions — nine — we  believe  to  be 
approximately  justified  by  an  analysis  of  the  roll  of  Shakespeare's 
works  in  relation  to  the  circumstances  of  the  case.  The  con- 
ventional Shakespearean  canon  consists  of  thirty-seven  plays. 
Of  these,  one — Titus  Andronicus — is  wholly  unpresentable  on 


SHAKESPEARE  39 

the  modern  stage ;  while  six — Troihis  and  Cressida,  Timon  of 
Athens,  Pericles,  and  the  three  parts  of  Henry  VI. — can  only 
be  presented,  with  doubtful  advantage,  after  heroic  curtailment 
and  manipulation.  We  do  not  say  that  they  ought  never  to  be 
attempted ;  but  they  cannot  possibly  take  a  permanent  place  in 
the  repertory  of  any  theatre.  Then,  again,  of  the  remaining 
plays,  five  would  probably  be  found  fitted  only  for  occasional 
revival  at  long  intervals :  The  Two  Gentlemen  of  Verona,  The 
Comedy  of  Errors,  and  Love's  Labour's  Lost,  as  immature  pro- 
ductions ;  All's  Well  that  Ends  Well,  as  likewise  immature  (in 
spite  of  re-touching),  and  inacceptable  in  theme  ;  and  Henry 
VIIL.,  as  a  formless  pageant  play,  which  has  very  little  claim  to 
rank  as  Shakespeare's.  There  remain,  then,  twenty-five  plays, 
which  ought  never  to  be  suffered  for  long  to  drop  out  of  the  re- 
pertory of  an  English  National  Theatre.  If  six,  on  an  average, 
were  revived  in  every  season,  the  whole  list  (save  one)  would  be 
gone  through  once  in  four  years  ;  while  in  each  season  certain 
plays,  carried  forward  from  the  season  or  seasons  before,  would 
be  considered,  not  as  revivals,  but  as  belonging  to  the  permanent 
substratum  of  the  repertory  —  what  is  called  in  France  the 
repertoire  courant.  We  take  it,  then,  that  in  this  initial  season 
three  plays  may  be  regarded  as  representing  the  Shakespearean 
element  in  this  permanent  substratum,  while  the  remaining  six 
are  about  equivalent  to  the  normal  revivals  of  a  normal  season. 

We  do  not,  of  course,  suggest  that  the  number  of  Shake- 
spearean productions  in  a  season  would  be  regulated  with 
mathematical  accuracy ;  nor  do  we  assume  that  our  analysis  of 
the  plays  will  command  universal  assent.  All  we  suggest  is 
that  on  some  such  analysis,  and  on  some  such  principle  of 
rotation,  the  Shakespearean  work  of  the  Theatre  would  pro- 
bably have  to  be  founded. 


40  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

Shakespeare  apart,  the  Elizabethan  drama  has  fallen  into 
such  total  disuse  that  the  attempt  to  reanimate  for  the  theatrical 
public  a  representative  selection  of  plays,  though  absolutely 
imperative  upon  the  management,  would  have  to  be  gone 
about  slowly  and  cautiously.  We  believe  that  there  are 
probably  a  dozen — perhaps  even  a  score — of  the  plays  of 
Shakespeare's  contemporaries  that  have  still  the  breath  of 
theatrical  life  in  them.  Careful  experiment  will  ultimately 
separate  them  from  the  mass.  But  in  a  first  season,  and  until 
the  main  lines  of  the  repertory  are  firmly  established,  we  felt 
that  it  would  be  unwise  to  devote  much  time  and  energy  to 
such  experiments.  Out  of  several  Elizabethan  plays  which 
we  considered — some  of  them  in  themselves  more  interesting 
than  Every  Man  in  his  Humour — we  chose  Ben  Jonson's 
comedy  as  being  probably  the  least  experimental.  Its  theatrical 
qualities  have  been  tested  in  comparatively  recent  years — 
notably  by  that  company  of  distinguished  amateurs  of  which 
Charles  Dickens  was  the  inspiring  genius. 

The  plays  of  the  late  seventeenth  and  early  eighteenth 
century  would,  for  notorious  reasons,  require  very  careful 
handling.  Some  of  them,  however,  might  doubtless  be  made 
available  for  the  modern  stage ;  and  having  satisfied  ourselves 
that  Congreve's  Love  for  Love  could  be  presented  with  com- 
paratively slight  curtailment — stopping  far  short  of  mutilation 
— we  thought  there  could  be  no  doubt  that  the  first  place 
belonged  to  it,  as  the  representative  play  of  its  period. 

In  the  later  eighteenth  century  there  is  no  lack  of 
presentable  material ;  but  the  three  undoubted  masterpieces  of 
the  period  are  so  familiar  that  there  seemed  to  be  no  particular 
hurry  for  adding  them  to  the  repertory.  On  the  other  hand. 
The  Critic  has  not  been  seen  for  something  like  half  a  century, 


MODERN    REVIVALS  41 

except  in  a  truncated  form,  and  at  "  benefit "  performances 
when  unlimited  clowning  was  the  order  of  the  day.  We 
selected  it,  then,  from  among  several  competitors,  as  the 
representative  for  this  season  of  the  Georgian  Age. 

The  choice  of  a  play  to  represent  the  first  half  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  was  by  no  means  easy,  though  the  embarrass- 
ment was  scarcely  one  of  riches.  At  last  we  fixed  upon 
Money — of  course  to  be  dressed,  and  so  far  as  possible  acted, 
after  the  manner  of  the  early  Victorian  period.  Our  choice 
was  finally  determined  by  the  consideration  that,  the  Mid- 
Victorian  period  being  inevitably  represented  by  its  one  master- 
piece, Caste,  we  should  be  able  to  insert  between  the  two, 
Mr.  Pinero's  delightful  comedy,  Trelawny  of  the  Wells,  and 
thus  give,  in  a  sort  of  comedy  cycle,  illustrations  of  the  old 
rhetorical  and  new  realistic  methods,  with  a  fanciful,  yet  not 
unfaithful,  history  of  the  transition  between  the  two. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  go  at  length  into  the  reasons  which 
prompted  our  selection  of  recent  English  plays.  Of  most  of 
these  pieces  we  may  say,  as  we  said  of  the  actors  in  the 
company,  that  they  are  to  be  taken  as  types  rather  than  as 
individuals.  All  of  them  are  subject  to  stage-right,  and  in 
some  cases  permission  to  revive  them  might  not  be  obtain- 
able. But  if  this  one  or  that  failed  us,  there  would  be  no 
lack  of  others  to  fall  back  upon.  It  would  be  more  difficult, 
perhaps,  to  explain  the  absence  of  certain  plays  and  authors 
from  the  list  than  to  justify  the  presence  of  any  play  which 
appears  on  it.  Why,  for  instance,  are  Mr.  Pinero's  farces 
unrepresented  ?  Why  do  the  names  of  Mr.  J.  M.  Barrie, 
Mr.  Stephen  Phillips,  Mr.  H.  V.  Esmond,  Mr.  Anthony  Hope, 
Mr.  Louis  Parker,  Captain  Robert  Marshall,  Mr.  H.  H.  Davies, 
nowhere  appear  ?     The   answer  is   simple — namely,  that  there 


42  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

are  only  so-and-so  many  nights  in  a  season,  and  that  it  is 
impossible  within  the  limits  of  one  year  to  sample  a  whole 
literature.  Besides,  some  of  the  authors  whose  names  are 
absent  from  our  list  of  revivals  may  be  lurking  in  disguise 
under  the  rubric  of  New  Plays. 

Though,  in  selecting  modern  plays  for  revival,  we  have  in 
the  main  deferred  to  the  generally  expressed  theatrical  taste 
of  the  past  ten  or  twelve  years,  we  do  not  wish  to  imply  an 
opinion  that  this  taste  is  all  that  can  be  desired,  or  that  it 
would  be  specially  fostered  by  the  National  Theatre.  On  the 
contrar}',  we  believe  that  the  "society  play" — the  drama  of 
"frocks  and  frills" — bulks  far  too  largely  on  the  stage  of 
to-day ;  and  one  of  the  chief  advantages  of  the  National 
Theatre  would  lie  in  its  providing  an  escape  from  the  con- 
ditions which  at  present  are  thought  to  impose  this  type  of 
play  upon  both  managers  and  authors.  There  is  no  doubt 
that  a  large  section  of  the  public  is  being  gradually  alienated 
from  the  theatre  by  a  sense  of  the  monotony  of  the  fare  pro- 
vided ;  and  as  we  were  bound  to  choose  from  among  existing 
plays,  we  could  not  help,  in  some  measure,  reproducing  that 
monotony.  But  after  a  few  seasons,  when  the  repertory  had 
been  recruited  by  the  new  productions  of  the  Theatre,  the 
sameness  would  disappear.  It  would  be  the  object  of  the 
Theatre,  not  to  perpetuate  the  dramatic  tradition  of  the  past 
ten  years,  but  largely  to  widen  the  range  of  subjects  and 
methods  open  to  the  dramatist.  It  would  produce  some,  no 
doubt,  of  the  plays  that  are  written  to-day,  but  also  many  that 
are  not;  and  it  would  aim  at  reconciling  to  the  drama  many 
people  who  are  now  more  or  less  estranged  from  it. 

One  play  only  among  our  revivals  has  not  had  its  theatrical 
quality  tested  by  performance   at  a  regular  London  theatre — 


NEW   PLAYS  43 

to  wit,  Mr.  W.  B.  Yeats's  Countess  Cathleen.  This  we 
included,  not  only  because  of  its  rare  beauty,  but  because  we 
felt  that  the  representative  character  of  the  repertory  demanded 
that  the  new  Irish  drama  should  hold  an  honourable  place  in 
it.  We  regretted  our  inability  to  find  an  American  play  that 
seemed  suited  for  revival ;  but  as  the  great  majority  of 
American  plays  are  unprinted,  or  were,  at  all  events,  inacces- 
sible to  us,  our  failure  to  discover  one  must  by  no  means  be 
taken  as  meaning  that  no  such  play  exists.  Perhaps,  too, 
America  may  be  represented  among  the  New  Plays. 

With  regard  to  these,  it  must  be  distinctly  understood 
that  they  are  quite  imaginary.  It  was  obvious  that  a  season 
in  which  no  provision  was  made  for  new  plays  would  not  be 
typical.  We  had,  then,  to  leave  room  for  what  seemed  a  fair 
number  of  new  productions ;  but  in  no  case  had  we  in  mind 
any  existing  unacted  play ;  nor  did  we  mentally  assign  any  one 
of  them  to  an  individual  dramatist.  Thus  the  larger  or  smaller 
number  of  performances  allotted  to  each  new  play  indicates 
merely  our  forecast  of  average  probability,  not  any  judgment 
as  to  the  greater  or  smaller  attractiveness  of  any  particular 
author's  work. 

It  seemed  to  us  evident  that,  although  in  any  National  Theatre 
the  national  drama  must  hold  by  far  the  most  prominent  place, 
yet  the  dramatic  literature  of  foreign  nations  ought  also  to  be 
represented  in  due  proportion.  As  regards  the  classical  litera- 
ture of  France,  the  apparent  impossibility  of  rendering  the 
Alexandrine  by  any  tolerable  English  equivalent  restricts  within 
narrow  limits  the  material  from  which  it  is  possible  to  choose. 
We  at  last  fixed  upon  Moli^re's  Don  Juan  as  perhaps  the 
greatest  of  his  prose  works,  and  one  which  can  certainly  be 
made  effective  in  its  English   dress.     Several  German  classics 


44  NATIONAL  THEATRE       ' 

we  had  under  consideration,  but  failed  to  find  room  for  any  of 
them  in  this  season's  repertory.  Of  modern  plays,  we  chose 
Dumas's  Francillon  as  representing  what  may  be  called  the 
Second  Empire  theatre  at  its  best  (though  it  was  produced 
under  the  Republic) ;  Brieux's  La  Robe  Rouge  as  a  characteris- 
tic and  easily  transplantable  specimen  of  the  French  drama  of 
to-day ;  Johannisfeuer  as  the  most  poetic,  and  at  the  same  time 
one  of  the  most  interesting  of  the  plays  of  Sudermann  ;  and 
Pelleas  and  Melisande  as  that  play  of  Maeterlinck's  which 
had  most  clearly  proved  its  theatrical  quality.  But  in  the  case 
of  the  foreign,  as  well  as  of  the  English  modern  plays,  our  selec- 
tion is  to  be  regarded  as  merely  illustrative.  There  were  many 
others  which  we  might  equally  well  have  chosen,  and  of  which 
the  one  actually  selected  must  be  taken  as  a  type. 

One  adaptation,  A  Pair  of  Spectacles,  has  slipped  into  our 
repertory  almost  by  inadvertence.  It  holds  an  exceptional  posi- 
tion, being,  in  fact,  a  fairy  tale,  as  much  at  home  in  England  as 
in  France.  The  rule  would  be,  of  course,  that  foreign  plays 
should  be  translated,  not  adapted. 

We  have  purposely  excluded  from  this  specimen  repertory 
all  plays  of  the  class  which  may  be  called  disputable,  designing 
to  show  that  there  was  ample  material  at  the  command  of  the 
Theatre  without  travelling  beyond  the  range  of  universally 
accepted  classics,  and  modern  work  which  has  proved  its  at- 
tractiveness for  the  English  public.  For  this  reason  the  names 
of  Tolstoy,  Gorky,  Ibsen,  Bjornson,  Hauptmann,  D'Annunzio, 
and  Bernard  Shaw  do  not  figure  in  our  list  of  authors.  That 
some  of  these  writers'  works  would  before  long  find  house-room 
in  the  Theatre  we  can  scarcely  doubt ;  but  we  have  shown  that 
a  rich  and  varied,  if  not  a  thoroughly  representative,  repertory 
can  be  formed  without  them.     Nothing,  as  we  have  pointed  out, 


ONE-ACT   PLAYS  45 

can  be  more  mistaken  than  the  idea  that  a  National  Theatre 
ought  to  be,  or  would  be,  a  forcing-house  for  the  esoteric 
drama. 

It  would  be  a  principle  of  the  Theatre  that  front-pieces  and 
after-pieces  should  be  as  well  cast  and  as  carefully  treated  as  the 
plays  which  fill  the  main  part  of  the  programme.  We  have 
allowed  for  two  new  one-act  plays  and  five  revivals.  All  the 
revivals,  except  Mr.  Frederick  Fenn's  Judged  by  A2)pearances, 
may  seem  to  be  of  a  rather  serious  type.  The  reason  for  this  is 
that  the  plays  which  were  short  enough  to  require  a  front-piece 
were  mostly  of  the  lighter  order,  and  seemed  to  demand,  by  way 
of  contrast,  somewhat  graver  companionship.  We  had  no  de- 
sign of  excluding  the  bright  comedietta  or  even  the  rattling  farce, 
supposing  it  to  possess  any  real  humour  or  ingenuity.  We  in- 
tended to  include  in  the  repertory  one  other  one-act  play  of  a 
very  serious  type — Sudermann's  Fritzchen.  It  was  omitted, 
through  an  oversight,  until  our  calculations  were  almost  com- 
pleted ;  and  then,  as  it  was  not  indispensable,  we  did  not  think 
it  worth  while  to  undertake  the  long  series  of  corrections  that 
would  have  been  necessary  had  we  restored  it  to  its  place. 


[Schedule  of  Eepkrtory 


46 


NATIONAL  THEATRE 

SCHEDULE  OF  REPERTOKY. 


Num- 

Author. 

Play. 

First  Per- 

Last Per- 

ber of 

formance. 

formance. 

Perfor- 

mances. 

I.  Shakespeare 

King  Richard  II.    . 

Sept.    15 

July 

15 

12 

2.             „                .         . 

King  Henry  IV.,  Ft.  I.  . 

,.       17 

)» 

18 

12 

3-            >.              .        • 

King  Henry  IV.,  Pt.  II. 

„       18 

Apr. 

24 

5 

4-           ,,              .        • 

King  Henry  V. 

„       20 

July 

21 

10 

5.  Pinero 

The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt 

..      23 

1) 

24 

12 

6.  Henley  &  Stevenson 

Beau  Austin  . 

,,       29 

Dec. 

17 

7 

7.     1  (New  Play) . 

Saint  Cecilia  . 

Oct.       7 

July 

22 

41 

8.  GUbert     . 

Tom  Cobb 

»        17 

Nov. 

15 

6 

9.  Congreve  . 

Love  for  Love 

3' 

July 

27 

9 

10.  Chambers 

The  Tyranny  of  Tears    . 

Nov.      7 

Nov. 

20 

4 

11.  Moliere     . 

Don  Juan 

„          21 

July 

29 

7 

12.     1  (New  Play)  . 

The  Flight  of  the  Duchess 

..     25 

Dec. 

30 

10 

13.  Wilde       . 

The  Importance  of  being 

Earnest      . 

Dec       6 

Jan. 

31 

5 

14.  Shakespeare 

The  Tempest . 

,,       12 

Aug. 

I 

31 

15.  Labiche  &  Grundy   . 

A  Pair  of  Spectacles 

Jan.       6 

Jan. 

17 

3 

16.  Shakespeare 

The  Taming  of  the  Shrew 

„       17 

July 

30 

13 

17.  Sudermann 

Johannisfeuer 

„       21 

Feb. 

4 

4 

18     1  (New  Play)  . 

The  Backwater 

>.       31 

)) 

II 

4 

19.  Sheridan  . 

The  Critic 

Feb.       7 

July 

20 

9 

20.  Yeats 

The  Countess  Cathleen  . 

>.       13 

J) 

31 

6 

21.  Jones 

The  Liars 

»       23 

1) 

28 

9 

22.  Shakespeare 

Hamlet  .... 

„          28 

J) 

25 

19 

23.     ?  (New  Play)  . 

The  Chiltern  Hundreds . 

Mar.      6 

Aug. 

I 

43 

24.  Dumas  fils 

Francillon 

..       25 

July 

22 

10 

25.  Robertson 

Caste       .... 

April    6 

)} 

16 

7 

26.  Shakespeare 

Romeo  and  Juliet  . 

»       17 

n 

18 

13 

27.  Brieux 

La  Robe  Rouge 

May      2 

it 

8 

7 

28.  Jonsou 

Every  Man  in  his  Humour 

8 

jy 

25 

7 

29.     ?  (New  Play) . 

Hodge  and  the  Vicar 

.)       15 

June 

10 

8 

30.  Carton 

Lady   Hunt  worth's    Ex- 

periment  . 

26 

July 

10 

7 

31.  Shakespeare 

As  You  Like  It 

June      3 

J) 

23 

9 

32.  Pinero 

Trelawny  of  the  Wells    . 

.,          9 

if 

15 

6 

33.  Maeterlinck 

Pelleas  and  Melisande    . 

>.        19 

)) 

6 

6 

34.  Bulwer  Lytton 

Money    .... 

July     II 

>) 

14 

2 

Total     . 

363 

ON 

E-ACT  AND  TWO-ACT  PLAYS. 

Gilbert    . 

Sweethearts. 

Yeats 

The  Land  of  Heart's  Desire 

Tennyson 

The  Falcon. 

Hcrz  and  Wills 

lolanthe. 

Fenn 

Judged  by  Appearances. 

?  (New  Play) 

At  the  Dock  Gates. 

?  (New  Play) 

The  Spartan. 

REPERTORY   CLASSIFIED 

The  specimen  Repertory  may  be  analysed  as  follows : — 

New  Plats  :  Performances. 

Saint  Cecilia      .  .         .         .         .         .         41 

The  Flight  of  the  Duchess . 
The  Backwater  . 
The  Chiltern  Hundreds 
Hodge  and  the  Vicar 


47 


Elizabethan  Comedy  : 

Every  Man  in  his  Humour  .         . 

Restoration  Comedy: 

Love  for  Love  ..... 
Eighteenth  Century  Comedy  : 

The  Critic 

Nineteenth  Century  Comedy  (before  1870)  : 

Caste  ...... 

Money        ...... 


Modern  English  Plays  (since  1870)  : 
The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt  . 
Beau  Austin       .... 
Tom  Cobb  .... 

The  Tyranny  of  Tears 
The  Importance  of  being  Earnest 
The  Countess  Cathleen 
The  Liars  ..... 
Lady  Huntworth's  Experiment  . 
Trelawny  of  the  Wells 


10 
4 

43 


Revivals  : 

Hhakespeare  : 

King  Eichard  IL       . 

12 

King  Henry  IV.,  Pt.  I. 

12 

King  Henry  IV.,  Pt.  II. 

5 

King  Henry  V. 

10 

The  Tempest 

31 

The  Taming  of  the  Shrew 

13 

Hamlet 

19 

Romeo  and  Juliet 

13 

As  You  Like  It 

9 

106 


124 


12 

7 
6 

4 

5 
6 

9 
7 
6 


62 


48  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

Eevivals  :  Pebformancbs. 

Foreign  Classic: 

Don  Juan  .......  7 

Modern  Foreign  Plays  : 
French  : 

A  Pair  of  Spectacles        ....  3 

Francillon       ......         10 

La  Robe  Rouge       .....  7 

Pelleas  and  Melisande    ....  6 


German  : 

Johannisfeuer 


30 


Grand  total     .  363* 

It  thus  appears  that  326  performances  are  devoted  to 
English  plays — 37  to  foreign  plays;  106  performances  are 
devoted  to  new  plays,  257  to  revivals;  124  performances  are 
devoted  to  Shakespeare,  34  to  old  English  plays,  other  than 
Shakespeare,  and  62  to  revivals  of  recent  English  plays. 

Our  own  criticism  of  this  specimen  season  would  be  that 
Shakespeare  occupies  rather  too  much  space  in  it,  and  new 
plays    rather   too    little.       Perhaps,    in    a   normal    season,    the 

*  It  may  be  of  interest  to  summarise  the  repertory-list  of  the  Tlieiitre-Frangais 
during  the  season  1902-1903.  Seven  new  plays  in  three  or  four  acts  were  produced, 
and  were  performed  respectively  4,  5,  12,  16,  40,  41,  and  84  times.  Five  new  one-act 
plays  were  produced.  There  were  6  important  revivals,  the  plays  in  question  being 
performed  respectively  2,  7,  8,  12,  14,  and  15  times  ;  and  there  were  7  revivals  of  one- 
act  plays.  Then,  in  the  repertoire  courant  were  included  14  tragedies,  32  comedies 
in  three,  four,  or  five  acts,  and  19  comedies  in  one  or  two  acts.  Of  the  longer  [days  in 
the  repertoire  cotirant,  3  were  acted  only  once,  3  twice,  3  thrice,  5  four  times,  8  five 
times,  3  six  times,  4  seven  times,  4  eight  times,  i  nine  times,  5  ten  times,  2  eleven 
times,  2  twelve  times,  i  thirteen  times,  i  fourteen  times,  and  i  seventeen  times.  It 
thus  appears  that  59  plays  in  three  acts  and  over  were  performed,  as  against  our  34, 
and  31  plays  in  one  or  two  acta,  a^  against  our  7.  To  account  for  these  differences  it 
may  be  noted  that  the  Theatre-Frangais  gives  70  or  80  more  performances  in  the  year 
than  we  have  reckoned  for,  and  that  performances  of  two  or  three  pieces  in  one 
programme  are  the  rule  rather  than  the  exception.  It  is  quite  common  for  a  five- 
act  classical  tragedy  and  a  three-act  or  even  five-act  comedy  to  compose  a  single 
programme. 


REPERTORY 


49 


lOO 


proportions  would  be  reversed — that  is  to  say,  about 
Shakespearean  performances  would  be  given,  and  from  130  to 
150  performances  of  new  plays.  As  for  the  other  elements 
in  the  repertory,  we  believe  that  their  proportions  are  pretty 
fairly  adjusted ;  though  the  space  given  to  non-Shakespearean 
classics  is  smaller  than  it  would  probably  become  when  the 
repertory  was  thoroughly  established. 

We  now  give  the  order  of  performances,   day  by  day,   for 
our  specimen  season  of  forty-six  weeks  : — 


REPERTORY. 

[When  a  play  is  performed  for  the  first  time,  its  name  is  printed  in  dark 
type;  when  for  the  last  time,  in  italics.  An  asterisk  attached  to  the  title  of  a 
play  shows  that  a  front-piece  or  after-piece  is  given  along  with  it.] 

Sept. 


Oct 


Monday 

IS  .     .     . 

.    King  Richard  II. 

Tuesday 

16  .     .     . 

Wednesday 

17  (aft.)  . 

1st  King  Henry  IV. 

Thursday 

18  .     .     . 

.    2nd  King  Henry  IV. 

Friday 

19   .     .     . 

Saturday 

20  (aft.)  . 

King  Henry  V. 

Monday 

22   .     .     . 

.     Richard  II. 

Tuesday 

23    .     .     . 

.    The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt. 

Wednesday 

24  (aft)  . 

.     The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt, 
ist  Henry  IV. 

Thursday 

25   .     .     . 

2nd  Henry  IV. 

Friday 

26   .     .     . 

.     The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt 

Saturday 

27  (aft)  . 

.     Richard  II. 
Henry  V. 

Monday 

29  .     .     . 

.    Beau  Austin.* 

Tuesday 

30   .     .     . 

.     Beau  Austin.* 

Wednesday 

I   (aft)  . 

.      ist  Henry  IV. 

The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt. 

Thursday 

2   .     .     . 

.     Henry  V. 

Friday 

3  •     .     . 

.     The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt  (5th 
time). 

50  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

Oct.     Saturday         4  (aft.)  . 


Monday 
Tuesday 
Wednesday 

6  .     . 

7  ■     • 

8  (aft.) 

Thursday 

Friday 

Saturday 

9  •     • 

10  .     . 

11  (aft.) 

1» 

Monday 
Tuesday 
Wednesday 

13  •     • 

14  .     . 

15  (aft.) 

>> 

Thursday 

Friday 

Saturday 

16  .     . 

17  .     . 

18  (aft.) 

Monday 
Tuesday 

20  .     . 

21  .     . 

»» 

Wednesday 

22   (aft.) 

Thursday 

Friday 

Saturday 

23  ■     • 

24  .     . 

25  (aft.) 

Monday 
Tuesday 
Wednesday 

27  .     . 

28  .     . 

29  (aft.) 

Nov. 

Thursday 

Friday 

Saturday 

30  .     . 

31  •     • 

I  (aft.) 

„       Monday  3  .     . 

,,       Tuesday  4  .     . 

„       Wednesday     5  (aft.) 


2nd  Henry  IV. 

Beau  Austin.* 

The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt 

New  Play.    Saint  Cecilia. 

Henry  V. 

New  Play.     Saint  Cecilisi. 

Beau  Austin. 

New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 

New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 

New  Play.     Saint   Cecilia  (5th 

time). 
Richard  II. 

New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia, 
Beau  Austin  (5th  time). 
The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt. 
New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia, 
Tom  Cobb,* 
Tom  Cobb.* 

New  Play.  Saint  Cecilia. 
New  Play.  Saint  Cecilia. 
New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia  (loth 

time). 
Richard  II.  (5th  time). 
Tom  Cobb.* 
ist  Henry  IV. 
New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 
New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 
The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt. 
The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt. 
New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 
Heni-y  V.  (5th  time). 
Tom  Cobb.* 
Tom  Cobb  *  (sth  time). 

Love  for  Love,* 

Richard  II. 

Love  for  Love.* 

Love  for  Love.* 

New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 

New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia  (15th 

time). 
Henry  V. 


REPERTORY 


51 


Nov.  Thursday  6  . 

„  Friday  7  .     . 

,,  Saturday  8  (aft.) 

„  Monday  10  . 

,,  Tuesday  11.     . 

„  Wednesday  12  (aft.) 

„  Thursday  13  .     . 

„  Friday  14  .     . 

„  Saturday  15   (aft.) 

„  Monday  17  .     . 

„  Tuesday  18  .     . 

,,  Wednesday  19  (aft.) 


Thursday      20  .     . 

Friday  21  . 

Saturday       22  (aft.) 

Monday        24  .     . 
Tuesday        25  .     . 

Wednesday  26  (aft.) 


Thursday      27  . 
Friday  28  .     . 

Saturday       29  (aft.) 


Dec.     Monday 


Tuesday  2  . 

Wednesday     3  (aft.) 


Love  for  Love.* 

The  Tyranny  of  Tears. 

Love  for  Love  (sth  time). 

New  Play.     Saint  CecUia. 

New  Pky.     Saint  Cecilia. 

ist  Henry  IV.  (5th  time). 

ist  Henry  IV. 

The  Tyranny  of  Tears. 

The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt  (loth 

time). 
Love  for  Love.* 
New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 
Tom  Cohh  *  (6th  time). 
Richard  II. 

New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 
The  Tyranny  of  Tears. 
New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia  (20th 

time). 
The     Tyranny    of    Tears 

time). 
Don  Juan.* 

New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 
Don  Juan.* 
New  Play. 
New  Play. 

Duchess. 

Don  Juan.* 
New  Play. 

Duchess. 
Don  Jiian.* 
New  Play. 

Duchess. 
New  Play. 

Duchess. 
Henry  V. 
New  Play.     The   Flight  of  the 

Duchess  (5th  time). 
New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 
New  Play.     The  Flight  of  the 

Duchess. 
Richard  II. 


(4th 


Saint  Cecilia. 

The  Flight  of  the 

The   Flight  of  the 

The  Flight  of  the 
The  FHght  of  the 


52  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

Dec.     Thursday        4  .     .     . 


Friday  5  .     .     . 

Saturday         6  (aft.)  . 


Monday  S  .     .     , 

Tuesday  9  .     .     , 

Wednesday  10  (aft.) 


„       Thursday       11  . 
„        Friday  12   .     . 

„       Saturday       13  (aft.) 


„  Monday         15  .     . 

„  Tuesday         16  .     . 

„  Wednesday  17  (aft.) 

„  Thursday      18  .     . 

„  Friday  19  .     . 

,,  Saturday       20  (aft.) 

„  Monday         22  .     . 

„  Tuesday        23  .     . 

„  Wednesday  24  (aft.) 

„  Thursday       25  .     . 

„  Friday  26  (aft.) 

„  Saturday       27  (aft.) 

„  Monday         29  .     . 

„  Tuesday        30  .     . 

„  Wednesday  31  (aft.) 

Jan.  Thursday         i  .     . 

„  Friday  2  .     . 


New  Play.      The    Flight  of  the 

Duchess. 
ist  Henry  IV. 
Don  Juan  *  (5th  time). 

The  Importance  of  being 
Earnest. 

Henry  V. 

New  Play.  The  Flight  of  the 
Duchess. 

The  Importance  of  being  Ear- 
nest.* 

New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 

Beau  Austin.* 

The  Tempest. 

New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia  (25th 

time). 
New  Play.     The  Flight  of  the 

Duchess. 
The  Tempest. 
Don  Juan.* 
The  Tempest. 
Beaii,  Austin  *  (7th  time). 
The  Importance  of  being  Earnest.* 
The  Tempest. 

The  Importance  of  being  Earnest.* 
Love  for  Love.* 
The  Tempest  (5th  time). 
The  Tempest. 
The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt. 

(Christmas  Day). 
ist  Henry  IV.  (Boxing  Day). 
The  Tempest 

New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 
The  Tempest. 
The  Tempest. 
New   Play.       The  Flight  of  the 

Duchess  (loth  time). 
The  Tempest  (loth  time). 
New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 
The  Tempest. 
The  Tempest. 


REPERTORY 


53 


Jan.     Saturday         3  (aft.)  . 


Feb. 


Monday 
Tuesday 
Wednesday 

5  •     •     • 

6  .     .     . 

7  (aft.)  . 

Thursday 

Friday 

Saturday 

8  .     .     . 

9  .     .     . 
10  (aft.)  . 

Monday 
Tuesday 

12  .     .     . 

13  .     .     . 

Wednesday 

14  (aft.)  . 

Thursday 

Friday 

Saturday 

15  •     •     • 

16  .     .     . 

17  (aft.)  . 

Monday 
Tuesday 
Wednesday 

19  .     .     . 

20  .     .     . 

21  (aft.)  . 

Thursday 

Friday 

Saturday 

22  .      .     . 

23  .     .     . 

24  (aft.)  . 

Monday 
Tuesday 
Wednesday 

26  .     .     . 

27  .     .     . 

28  (aft.)  . 

Thursday 

Friday 

Saturday 

29  .     .     . 

30  .     .     . 

31  .     .     . 

Monday 
Tuesday 

2  .       .      . 

3  •     •     • 

Wednesday     4  (aft.) 


Richard  II. 

New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 

The  Tempest. 

A  Pair  of  Spectacles.* 

The  Tempest. 

New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 

The  Tempest  (15th  time). 

The  Tempest. 

The  Tempest. 

Love  for  Love.* 

The  Tempest. 

New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia  (30th 

time). 
The  Tempest. 
New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 
A  Pair  of  Spectacles.* 
The  Tempest  (20th  time). 
A  Pair  of  Spectacles*  (3rd  time). 
The  Taming  of  the  Shrew. 
The  Tempest. 
The  Taming  of  the  Shrew. 
The  Tempest. 
Johannisfeuer. 
The  Taming  of  the  Shrew. 
The  Tempest. 
Johannisfeuer. 
New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 
The  Tempest. 
New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 
The  Tempest  (25th  time). 
The  Taming  of  the  Shrew. 
Johannisfeuer. 
The  Tempest 
The  Importance  of  being  Earnest  * 

(5th  time). 

New  Play.    The  Backwater. 

New  Play.     The  Backwater. 
The  Taming  of  the  Shrew  (5th 

time). 
The  Taming  of  the  Shrew. 
Johannisfeuer  (4th  time). 


54 


NATIONAL   THEATRE 


Feb. 

Thursday 

5  •     •     • 

.     New  Play.     The  Backwater. 

>» 

Friday 

6  .     .     . 

.     New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 

11 

Saturday 

7  (aft.)  . 

.     The  Tempest. 
The  Critic* 

t> 

Monday 

9  .     .     . 

.     The  Taming  of  the  Shrew. 

ij 

Tuesday 

lO   .      .      . 

.     The  Critic* 

I) 

Wednesday 

II   (aft.)  . 

•     New  Play.     The  Backwater  (4th 
time). 
New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia  (3sth 

time). 

fi 

Thursday 

12    .       .       . 

.     The  Critic* 

it 

Friday 

13    .       .       . 

.    The  Countess  Cathleen. 

»> 

Saturday 

14  (aft.)  . 

.     New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 
The  Tempe.st. 

»> 

Monday 

16  .     .     . 

.     New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 

11 

Tuesday 

17  .     .     . 

.     The  Countess  Cathleeu. 

i» 

Wednesday 

18  (aft.)  . 

.     The  Critic* 
ist  Henry  IV. 

If 

Thursday 

19  .     .     . 

.     The  Countess  Cathleen. 

»> 

Friday 

20  .     .     . 

.     New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 

i> 

Saturday 

21  (aft.) 

.     The  Taming  of  the  Shrew. 
The  Critic  *  (sth  time). 

I) 

Monday 

23  .     .     . 

.    The  Liars. 

11 

Tuesday 

24  .     .     . 

.     New  Play.     Saint  Cecilia. 

» 

Wednesday 

25   (aft.)  . 

.     The  Countess  Cathleen. 
The  Critic* 

II 

Thursday 

26  .     .     . 

.     The  Liars. 

II 

Friday 

27  .      .      . 

.     The  Taming  of  the  Shiew. 

II 

Saturday 

28  (aft.)  . 

.     The  Liars. 

Hamlet. 

!arch 

Monday 

2  .     .     . 

.     The  Critic* 

II 

Tuesday 

3  •     •• 

Hamlet. 

II 

Wednesday 

4  (aft.)  . 

.     The  Liars. 

Tlie  Countess  Cathleen  (5th  time). 

II 

Thursday 

5  •     •     • 

.     Hamlet. 

•1 

Friday 

6  .     .     , 

.    New    Play.      The    Chiltem 
Hundreds. 

•1 

Saturday 

7  (aft.)  . 

.     Hamlet. 

New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

» 

Monday 

9  .     .     . 

.     Hamlet  (5th  time). 

REPERTORY 


55 


March. 


Tuesday 
Wednesday 


10  . 

11  (aft.) 


Thursday 

Friday 

Saturday 

Monday 

Tuesday 

Wednesday 

Thursday 
Friday 


12  .       . 

13  •       ■ 

14  (aft.) 

16  .     . 

17  .     . 

18  (aft.) 

19  .     . 

20  . 


Saturday       21  (aft.) 


Monday 
Tuesday 
Wednesday 


Thursday 
Friday 


23  •     • 

24  .     . 

25  (aft.) 

26  .     . 

27  .     . 


Saturday       28  (aft.) 


April. 


Monday 
Tuesday 
Wednesday 


30  .     . 

31  •     . 

I  (aft.) 


The  Chiltern  Hun- 


The  Chiltern  Hun- 


The  Liars  (5  th  time). 

New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

Hamlet. 

New  Play, 
dreds. 

New  Play. 

dreds  (5th  time). 

The  Critic* 

Hamlet. 

New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

Hamlet. 

The  Liars. 

Richard  II.  (loth  time). 

New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

ist  Henry  IV.  (loth  time). 

New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds (loth  time). 

New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

The  Taming  of  the  Shrew  (loth 
time). 

Francillon. 

Francillon. 

New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

New  Play, 
dreds. 

Hamlet. 

New  Play, 
dreds. 

New  Play. 

dreds  (15th  time) 

Francillon 

Hamlet  (loth  time) 


The  Chiltern  Hun- 


The  Chiltern  Hun- 


The  Chiltern  Hun- 


56 


NATIONAL   THEATRE 


April.   Thursday         2  .     . 
„       Friday  3  .     . 

„       Saturday         4  (aft.) 


„       Monday  6  .     . 

„       Tuesday  7  .     . 

„      Wednesday     8  (aft.) 


„       Thursday        g  .     . 
,,       Friday  10  .     . 

„       Saturday       1 1  (aft.) 


„       Monday         13  (aft) 
„      Tuesday        14  .     . 
„       Wednesday  15  (aft.) 


,,       Thursday       16  .     . 
„       Friday  17  .     . 

„       Saturday        18  (aft.) 


„  Monday  20  .     . 

„  Tuesday  21  .     . 

„  Wednesday  22  (aft.) 

,,  Thursday  23  .     . 

„  Friday  24  .     . 

„  Satiu-day  25  (aft.) 

„  Monday  27  .     . 


2nd  Henry  IV. 

New  Play.  The  ChUtern  Hun- 
dreds. 

New  Play.  The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

Francillon. 

Caste.* 

New  Play.  The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

New  Play.  The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

Hamlet. 

Caste.* 

(Good  Friday.) 

Francillon  (5th  time). 

New  Play.  The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds (20th  time). 

Hamlet.     (Easter  Monday.) 

The  Taming  of  the  Shrew. 

New  Play.  The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

The  Liars. 

New  Play.  The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

Francillon. 

Romeo  and  Juliet. 

Caste.* 

New  Play.  The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

Richard  II.  (Shakespeare 
Week.) 

The  Tempest. 

The  Taming  of  the  Shrew, 

ist  Henry  IV. 

Hamlet.  (Shakespeare's  birth- 
day.) 

2nd  Henry  IV  (^th.  time). 

Romeo  and  Juliet. 

Henry  V. 

New  Play.  The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 


REPERTORY 


57 


April. 


May. 


Tuesday 

28 

.     .    . 

.     New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds (25th  time). 

Wednesday 

29 

(aft.)  . 

.     New  Play.     The  ChUtern  Hun- 
dreds. 
Francillon. 

Thursday 

30 

•          ■ 

,     Romeo  and  Juliet. 

Friday 

I 

.     Hamlet. 

Saturday 

2 

(aft.)  . 

.     Romeo  and  Juliet. 

La  Robe  Rouge. 

Monday 

4 

. 

La  Robe  Rouge. 

Tuesday 

5 

.     The  Liars. 

Wednesday 

6 

(aft.)  . 

.     Hamlet  (15th  time). 

New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dred.s. 

Thursday 

7 

>          •          • 

.     La  Robe  Rouge. 

Friday 

8 

.    Every  Man  in  His  Humour. 

Saturday 

9 

(aft.)  . 

.     New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 
Romeo  and  Juliet  (5th  time). 

Monday 

II 

•     .     • 

.     Romeo  and  Juliet. 

Tuesday 

12 

.     .     . 

.     New  Play.     The  ChUtern  Hun- 
dreds. 

Wednesday 

13 

(aft.)  . 

.     Caste.* 
Hamlet. 

Thursday 

14 

.     Every  Man  in  His  Humour. 

Friday 

IS 

.    New  Play.     Hodge  and  the 
Vicar. 

Satui-day 

16 

(aft.)  . 

.     La  Robe  Rouge. 

New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds (30th  time). 

Monday 

18 

.     .     . 

.     New    Play.       Hodge    and    the 
Vicar. 

Tuesday 

19 

■          ■          • 

,     Romeo  and  Juliet. 

Wednesday 

20 

(aft.)  . 

Every  Man  in  His  Humour. 
New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

Thursday 

21 

•     ■     • 

,     New  Play.   Hodge  and  the  Vicar. 

Friday 

22 

•     •     • 

.     New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

Saturday 

23 

(aft.)  . 

.     New  Play.   Hodge  and  the  Vicar. 
Hamlet. 

58 


NATIONAL  THEATRE 


tfay.     Monday 

25 

. 

.     La  Robe  Rouge  (5th  time). 

„       Tuesday 

26 

.     .    . 

.    Lady  Huntworth's  Experi- 
ment. 

„       Wednesday 

27 

(aft.)  . 

.     Romeo  and  Juliet. 

New    Play.      Hodge    and    the 
Vicar  (5th  time). 

„       Thursday 

28 

• 

.     Lady  Huntworth's  Experiment. 

„       Friday 

29 

.     .     . 

.     New    Play.      Hodge    and    the 
Vicar. 

„       Saturday 

30 

(aft.)  . 

.     New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 
Every  Man  in  His  Humour. 

June.    Monday 

I 

•           •          • 

Lady  Huntworth's  Experiment. 

„      Tuesday 

2 

•      •      • 

.     New    Play.      Hodge    and    the 
Vicar. 

„       Wednesday 

3 

(aft.)  . 

.     New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

As  You  Like  It. 

„       Thursday 

4 

•         •         • 

.     As  You  Like  It. 

„       Friday 

5 

•     •     • 

.     New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds (3sth  time). 

„       Saturday 

6 

(aft.)  . 

.     Francillon. 
As  You  Like  It. 

„       Monday 

8 

•           •           • 

.     Romeo  and  Juliet. 

„       Tuesday 

9 

.    Trelawny  of  the  Wells. 

„       Wednesday 

10 

(aft.)  . 

.     New  Play.     Hodge  and  the  Vicar 
(8th  time). 
Lady  Huntworth's  Experiment. 

„       Thursday 

II 

.     .     • 

.     Trelawny  of  the  Wells. 

„       Friday 

12 

•     •     • 

.     Every  Man  in  His  Humour  (5th 
time). 

„       Saturday 

13 

(aft.)  . 

.     As  You  Like  It. 

New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

„       Monday 

IS 

.     . 

.     Trelawny  of  the  Wells. 

„       Tuesday 

16 

•     •     • 

.     New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

„       Wednesday 

17 

(aft.)  . 

.     As  You  Like  It  (5  th  time). 
Trelawny  of  the  Wells. 

„       Thursday 

18 

.     • 

.     Caste  (5th  time). 

„       Friday 

'9 

•     • 

.    Pelleas  and  Melisande. 

REPERTORY 


59 


June.    Saturday      20  (aft.) 


Monday 


Tuesday  23  .  . 
Wednesday  24  (aft.) 

Thursday  25  .  . 
Friday           26  .     . 

»j 

Saturday       27  (aft.) 

Monday  29  .  . 
Tuesday        30  .     . 

iiy- 

Wednesday     i  (aft.) 

>> 

Thursday        2  .     . 

Friday  3  .  . 
Saturday         4  (aft.) 

Monday  6  .     . 

Tuesday  7  .     . 

Wednesday  8  (aft.) 

Thursday  9  .     . 

Friday  10  . 

Saturday  n  (aft.) 

Monday  13  ,     . 

Tuesday  14  .     . 

Wednesday  15  (aft.) 

Thursday  16  .     . 


Hamlet. 

New  Play.  The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds 

New  Play.  The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

Romeo  and  Juliet  (loth  time). 

Lady  Huntworth's  Experiment 
(loth  time). 

New  Play.  The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds (40th  time). 

Pelleas  and  Melisande.* 

Trelawny  of  the  Wells  (sth 
time). 

Pelleas  and  Melisande.* 

As  You  Like  It. 

As  You  Like  It. 

New  Play.  The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 

Pelleas  and  Meli.sande.* 

Eomeo  and  Juliet. 

Pelleas  and  Melisande  *  (5th 
time). 

Every  Man  in  His  Humour. 

Lady  Huntworth's  Experiment. 

La  Robe  Rouge. 

Pelleas  arid  Mdisande*  (6th 
time). 

Francillon. 

As  You  Like  It. 

La  Robe  Rouge  (7  th  time). 

Romeo  and  Juliet. 

Lady  Huntworth's  Experiment 
(7th  time). 

Caste.* 

Money. 

New  Play.     The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds. 
Money  (2nd  time). 
Richard  II.  (12th  time). 
Trelawny  of  the  Wells  (6th  time). 
Caste*  (7th  time). 


6o 


NATIONAL   THEATRE 


July.  Friday  17  .     . 

,,  Satui'day       18  (aft.) 

„  Monday        20  .     . 

„  Tuesday        21   .     . 

„  Wednesday  22  .     . 


Thursday      23  .     . 
Friday  24  .     . 

Saturday       25  (aft) 


Monday  27  .  . 
Tuesday  28  .  . 
Wednesday  29  (aft.) 

Thursday      30  .     , 


„       Friday 
Aug.    Saturday 


31 


I  (aft.) 


New  Play.  Saint  Cecilia  (40th 
time). 

ist  Henry  IV.  (12th  time). 

Romeo  and  Juliet  (13th  time). 

The  Critic  *  (9th  time). 

Henry  V.  (loth  time). 

New  Play.  Saint  Cecilia  (41st 
time). 

Francillon  (loth  time). 

As  You  Like  It  (9th  time). 

The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt  (12th 
time). 

Evert/  Man  in  His  Humour  (7th 
time). 

Hamlet  (19th  time). 

Love  for  Love  (9th  time), 

Tlie  Liars  (9th  time). 

The  Tempest  (30th  time). 

Don  Juan*  (7th  time). 

The  Taming  of  the  Shrew  (13th 
time). 

The  Countess  Cathleen  (6th  time). 

New  Play.  The  Chiltern  Hun- 
dreds (43rd  time). 

The  Tempest  (31st  time). 


SECTION  V 

Expenses  in  Front  of  the  House — Refreshments — Music. 

In  presenting  our  estimate  of  expenses  "  in  front  of  the 
house,"  we  have  only  one  comment  to  make.  The  reader 
who  examines  our  proposed  system  of  Subscription  Booking 
(Appendix  C)  may  be  disposed  to  think  that  it  will  demand 
a  larger  booking-office  staff  than  we  have  allowed.  After 
giving  the  matter  careful  thought,  however,  we  believe  that  this 
is  not  the  case.  When  once  the  system  was  in  working  order, 
the  subscription  seats  could  be  allotted  and  distributed  very 
quickly.  Monday  afternoon  (according  to  our  arrangement  in 
Rule  7,  p.  142)  would,  doubtless,  be  a  busy  time  at  the 
Theatre ;  and  the  services  of  the  whole  secretarial  staff, 
except  the  Director's  Secretary,  might  have  to  be  requisi- 
tioned ;  but  the  work  of  the  remainder  of  the  week  would 
be  proportionately  lightened.  On  the  whole,  we  believe  that 
the  system  would  mean  economy  in  box-office  work  rather 
than  the  reverse. 

Salaries  ix  Front  of  the  House. 

Acting  Manager  1  .......  jC3°°  ° 

Box-office : — 

ist  Clerk  1 250  o 

2nd  Clerk  1  .......  200  o 

3rd  Clerk-  .......  75  o 

'  Entitled  to  privileges  of  Pension  Fund. 
-  Also  Upper  Circle  Money-taker. 


62 


NATIONAL  THEATRE 


Salaries  in  Front  of  the  Hoi 

"SE — ( 

•ontinued. 

Secretarial  Staff : — 

Director's  Secretary 

200 

0 

Two  Typists  at  ^2  a  week     . 

200 

0 

Two  Typists  at  j£i,  10s.  a  week 

ISO 

0 

Three  Money-takers  at  ;^i  a  week  . 

150 

0 

Five  Check-takers  at  ;^i  a  week^     . 

250 

0 

Housekeeper 

125 

0 

Ten  Cleaners  at  los.  6d.  a  week  -     . 

262 

10 

Three  Firemen  at  ^2  a  week  . 

300 

0 

Hall  Porter 

75 

0 

Assistant  to  Hall  Porter  . 

40 

0 

Twelve  Ushers  at  i6s.  a  week  . 

4S0 

0 

Eight  Cloakroom  Attendants  at  i6s.  a  week 

320 

0 

Total 

• 

£zzn 

10 

The  Refreshment  Rooms  ought,  if  properly  managed,  to 
bring  in  a  substantial  revenue.  The  extravagant  prices  and 
execrable  quality  of  the  refreshments  supplied  at  most  London 
theatres  constitute  one  of  the  scandals  and  stupidities  of  the 
present  system.  At  many  theatres  the  refreshment-contractor 
is  also  licensed  to  demand  sixpence  for  a  playbill  covered 
with  advertisements,  and  for  the  privilege  of  depositing  an 
overcoat  or  umbrella  at  the  cloak-room.  All  these  abuses 
would  of  course  be  done  away  with.  The  refreshment-room 
would  no  longer  be  a  mere  drinking-bar,  but  more  like  a 
comfortable  and  well-managed  tea-room — with  a  license.  At 
the  theatre  bar  of  to-day,  nothing  is  to  be  had  to  eat,  except, 
perhaps,  a  few  macaroons  and  stale  sponge-cakes.  This  is 
a  great   mistake.      At   afternoon   performances,    in    particular, 

'  Men  in  uniform,  employed  at  the  end  of  the  performance  as  linkmen. 

-  This  (current)  rate  is  too  low  ;  but  as  7  or  8  of  the  cleaners  would  also  be  em- 
ployed as  dressers  (see  p.  67)  the  figure  here  stated  is  probably  in  excess  of  what  would 
actually  have  to  be  paid  under  this  head,  even  if  the  wages  for  cleaning  alone  were 
considerably  increased. 


MUSIC  63 

there  would  certainly  be  a  good  demand  for  light  eatables 
of  many  descriptions,  attractively  and  comfortably  served,  at 
moderate  prices.  The  management  would,  of  course,  keep 
this  department  in  its  own  control ;  and  as  the  public  would 
be  in  every  way  encouraged  to  leave  the  auditorium  between 
the  acts,  the  refreshment-rooms  would  doubtless  do  a  thriving 
trade.  We  believe  that  we  are  within  the  mark  in  estimating 
the  profit  at  _^iooo  a  year,  which  sum  we  accordingly  set  off 
against  our  total  expenses.     (See  p.  103.) 

In  many  continental  theatres,  part  of  the  ground-floor  of  the 
building  is  occupied  by  a  cafd-restaurant,  distinct  from  the 
theatre,  and  usually  let  to  a  private  caterer.  Such  a  restaurant, 
whether  let  or  retained  in  the  hands  of  the  management,  would 
be  a  very  desirable  adjunct  to  this  Theatre,  as  it  would  be  found 
a  great  convenience  by  those  habitual  frequenters  whom  the 
management  ought  to  make  every  endeavour  to  attract.  (See 
remarks  on  the  subscription  system,  pp.  85  and  140.)  The 
site  might  or  might  not  be  large  enough  to  allow  of  the  in- 
clusion of  a  restaurant  in  the  building ;  and  even  if  it  were 
large  enough,  there  seems  to  be  some  doubt  as  to  whether  the 
County  Council  regulations  would  not  stand  in  the  way  of  the 
scheme.  This  double  uncertainty  naturally  debars  us  from 
reckoning  on  the  restaurant  as  a  source  of  revenue ;  but  should 
it  prove  possible  it  would  certainly  prove  profitable. 

Salaries  of  Musical  Staff. 

Conductor  ^  . jQ  600 

Twelve  Bandsmen  at  ^150  a  year        .         .        .         1800 
Twelve  Bandsmen  at  _;^ 1 25  a  year        .         ,         .  1500 


Total       ,         ,      ;!£^39oo 
*  Entitled  to  privileges  of  Pension  Fund. 


64  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

At  the  Th^S.tre-Fran§ais,  and  indeed  at  most  of  the  leading 
theatres  of  France  and  Germany,  interact  music  is  altogether 
dispensed  with.  We  considered  the  possibility  of  following 
this  example,  but  decided  not  to  do  so.  The  innovation  would, 
no  doubt,  be  welcomed  by  many  people  ;  but  the  majority  would 
as  yet  be  opposed  to  it.  Nor,  in  a  theatre  where  Shakespeare 
was  constantly  in  the  bill,  would  the  abolition  of  interact  music 
mean  any  considerable  economy.  In  most  of  Shakespeare's  plays 
a  certain  amount  of  music  is  absolutely  indispensable.  A  com- 
petent musical  staff  would  therefore  have  to  be  provided  ;  and 
any  attempt  to  secure  the  services  of  this  stajQf  intermittently,  for 
Shakespearean  nights  alone,  would  result  in  inefficiency  without 
economy.  It  must  therefore  be  a  permanent  staff;  and  there 
would  clearly  be  no  economy  in  leaving  it  unemployed  on  nights 
when  its  services  were  not  absolutely  necessary.  At  the  same 
time,  there  is  no  doubt  that  many  people  sincerely  dislike  to  have 
irrelevant  music  thrust  upon  them  between  the  acts  of  a  play 
which  demands  no  musical  accompaniment.  By  way  of  meeting 
all  tastes,  then,  we  propose  that  only  "  incidental  music  " — that 
is,  music  specially  composed  for  a  play,  and  believed  to  be  par- 
ticularly appropriate  to  it — shall  be  performed  by  the  orchestra 
in  its  usual  place  in  the  auditorium  (or  beneath  the  stage) ;  and 
that,  when  plays  are  being  given  which  neither  possess  nor  admit 
of  "  incidental  music,"  the  orchestra  shall  play  between  the  acts, 
not  in  the  auditorium,  but  in  the  Saloon.^  This  system  will  have 
the  advantage  of  giving  people  an  extra  inducement  to  leave  the 
auditorium  between  the  acts  ;  while  those  can  always  remain  in 
it  who  do  not  wish  to  have  the  continuity  of  their  emotion  in- 
terrupted— or  their  conversation  drowned — by  music.     In  order 

'  An  overture,  before  the  rise  of  the  curtain,  might  or  might  not  be  performed  in 
the  auditorium. 


MUSIC  65 

that  this  system  may  work  satisfactorily,  the  Saloon  must  be 
designed  in  two  storeys,  as  it  were — the  main  hall  being  devoted 
to  the  occupants  of  the  stalls  and  first  circle,  while  the  galleries 
or  loggias  round  it  shall  accommodate  the  public  of  the  upper 
tiers.  Refreshments,  as  above  indicated,  would  be  served  in 
rooms  opening  off  the  Saloon.  If  the  system  were  properly 
carried  out,  audiences  would  soon  come  to  regard  the  interacts, 
not  as  necessary  inflictions,  but  as  a  substantive  element  in  the 
pleasures  of  the  evening. 


SECTION  VI 

Expenses  behind  the  Scenes — System  of  Producing. 

In  this  Section  we  estimate  the  salaries  of  all  employees  behind 
the  scenes,  other  than  those  who  appear  on  the  stage.  Salaries 
alone  are  included  ;  the  cost  of  materials,  &c.,  in  the  Scene-room 
and  Wardrobe  departments  will  be  found  in  the  next  Section, 
under  the  head  of  "  General  Expenses." 


Salaries  behind  the  Scenes. 


Stage-Manager! 

Head-Prompter  and  Librarian  ^  .  .  . 

Three  Under-Prompters  at  £ioo  a  year  . 
TwoCall-Boys.         ...  ... 

Two  Producers  1  at  ;^7  50  a  year 
Producing  fees  to  actors  who  may  undertake  produc 
tions     ........ 

Scene-Room  StaflP :  ^ — 

Principal  Scenic  Artist*    .... 

Second  Scenic  Artist  1        .... 

Two  Labourers  at  ^^75  a  year  . 
Wardrobe  Staff  :— 

Chief  of  Wardrobe  *  .... 

First  Assistant  ^ 

Second  Assistant       ..... 

Wardrobe  Mistress  ^  .... 

Extra  workers  not  permanently  employed 


^600 

0 

300 

0 

300 

0 

70 

0 

1500 

0 

600 

0 

600 

0 

300 

0 

150 

0 

300 

0 

200 

0 

100 

0 

250 

0 

700 

0 

'  Entitled  to  privileges  of  Pension  Fund. 

^  The  Principal  Scenic  Artist  would  have  the  right  to  take  pupils. 

66 


BEHIND  THE   SCENES 

Salaeies  behind  the  Scenes — continued. 

Carpenter's  Staff  : ' — 

Master  Carpenter^    .... 

Six  Daymen  at  ^^i,  4s.  a  week 

Five  Nightmen  '  at  _;^i  a  week 

Twenty  Nightmen  at  i6b.  a  week 
Property  Staff  : — 

Property  Master  and  Modeller  ' 

Head  Dayman  ..... 

Three  Daymen  at  _;^i,  4s.  a  week 

Seven  Nightmen  at  i6s.  a  week 
Engineer's  Staff : — 

Chief  Electrician  ^     .         .         .         . 

One  Dayman  at  ^2,  los.  a  week 

One  Cleaner  at  ;^i,  4s.  a  week  . 

Six  Nightmen  at  1 6a  a  week    . 
Fifteen  Dressers  at  16s.  a  week 
Extra  payments  to  Nightmen  and  Dressers  for  an 

average  of  2  dress-rehearsals  a  week 
Stage-Doorkeeper  2   ..... 
Assistant  Stage-Doorkeeper  *    . 


67 


Total 


£230 

0 

360 

0 

250 

0 

Soo 

0 

200 

0 

125 

0 

180 

0 

280 

0 

200 

0 

125 

0 

60 

0 

160 

0 

600 

0 

542 

10 

100 

0 

75 

0 

£\o,2Ti  10 


It  will  be  observed  that  for  the  production  of  pla3's  we 
have  provided  by  the  appointment  of  two  "  Producers "  and 
the  allotment  of  a  sum  for  special  fees  to  actors  of  the  com- 
pany who  may  undertake  occasional  productions.  The  assign- 
ment of  certain  productions  to  actors  of  the   company  (who, 

'  To  those  accustomed  to  the  mechanical  conditions  generally  prevalent  in  English 
theatres,  the  Carpenter's  Staff  and  Property  Staff  may  seem  unduly  small.  It  must 
be  remembered  that  we  assume  the  stage  to  be  fitted  with  labour-saving  appliances,  at 
present  scarcely  known  in  England,  and  that  we  contemplate  a  considerable  simplifi- 
cation of  the  scenery  that  will  have  to  be  handled.  See  Section  VII.  p.  72.  More- 
over, the  more  permanent  conditions  of  employment  which  would  obtain  in  this  as  in 
other  dejiartments  of  the  Theatre  would  in  time,  perhaps,  get  rid  of  some  of  the  labour- 
wasting  specialisations  of  function  which  now  exist. 

2  Entitled  to  privileges  of  Pension  Fund. 

'  Two  headmen  on  stage,  two  headmen  in  flies,  one  headman  in  cellar. 

*  Also  employed  in  front  of  the  house. 


68  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

of  course,  must  in  no  case  themselves  have  any  part  in  the 
productions  in  question)  has  this  advantage  among  others,  that 
it  enables  the  management  to  obtain  variety  in  methods  of 
production,  while  attaching  to  the  Theatre  actors  of  great  value 
in  particular  parts,  whose  range  might  be  too  limited  to  assure 
them  adequate  employment  without  the  aid  of  a  supplemen- 
tary activity,  such  as  that  of  producing.  Such  actors  are  often 
good  producers  of  difficult  plays,  and,  as  a  leaven  to  the 
general  mass,  may  prove  of  great  value  to  the  Theatre.  The 
number  of  performances  guaranteed  to  such  an  actor  in  his 
contract  would  be  small,  but  it  should  be  understood  that  his 
whole  income  would  be  brought  up  to  a  certain  minimum, 
either  by  extra  performances  or  by  the  fees  for  one  or  two 
productions.  Experience  would  soon  show  how  these  fees 
could  most  conveniently  be  regulated — whether  in  the  shape 
of  a  lump  sum  for  each  production,  or  a  fee  for  each  full 
rehearsal. 

Of  the  two  Producers,  one  would  probably  be  mainly 
employed  upon  rhetorical  and  costume  plays,  the  other  upon 
modern  and  realistic  plays.  It  is  needless  to  speculate 
whether  this  would  grow  into  a  hard-and-fast  distinction. 

Though  the  functions  of  the  Producer  include  what  is 
commonly  •  known  as  stage-management — the  regulation  of 
entrances,  exits,  positions,  business,  &c. — the  Stage-Manager, 
properly  so  called,  is  wholly  distinct  from  the  Producer  of 
a  play. 

The  routine  of  a  play's  production  will  be  somewhat  as 
follows : — Upon  the  decision  of  the  Heading  Committee  to 
produce  or  revive  a  play,  the  date  of  its  first  performance 
will  be  fixed  (approximately  at  any  rate)  by  the  Director, 
probably  in  consultation  with  the  Business  Manager  and  the 


PRODUCING  69 

Stage-Manager.  The  Director  will  then  select  a  Producer, 
and  the  book  of  the  play  will  be  handed  over  to  him.  One 
of  the  three  under-prompters  will  also  be  allotted  to  him  as  his 
lieutenant,  to  take  charge  of  all  the  minor  details.  Although 
the  Producer  must,  of  course,  be  in  constant  touch  with  the 
Stage-Manager,  the  latter's  active  responsibility  for  the  pro- 
duction will  not  begin  until  it  reaches  the  dress-rehearsal  period. 
The  Stage-Manager's  lieutenant,  the  Head-Prompter,  being  in 
charge  of  the  stage  and  rehearsal-room,  will  have  to  arrange  the 
time-table  of  rehearsals. 

The  Director  will  cast  the  play  in  consultation  with  the 
Producer.  When  the  Producer  has  thought  out  his  scheme 
of  production,  he  will  again  consult  with  the  Director,  and 
this  time  also  with  the  Stage-Manager,  the  Scene-Painter, 
and  the  head  of  the  wardrobe.  At  this  juncture  the  Pro- 
ducer's ideas  will  be  liable  to  criticism  and  modification,  the 
last  word  on  any  disputed  point  lying  always  with  the  Director. 
The  plan  of  production  will  at  this  stage  be  laid  down  in 
as  much  detail  as  possible. 

Eehearsals  will  begin,  and  although  the  Director,  over- 
seeing everything,  may  attend  one  or  two,  he  will  probably 
reserve  all  official  criticism  till  a  later  period.  The  Producer, 
at  all  events,  wiU  be  solely  responsible  for  the  play  until  the 
dress-  and  scene-rehearsals  begin.  The  Stage-Manager's  con- 
trol of  the  play  begins  with  the  first  fuU-dress  rehearsal.  He 
is  responsible  for  all  the  mechanical  work  on  the  stage.  The 
Producer  retains  artistic  authority,  subject  to  the  official  criti- 
cism of  the  Director. 

No  excision  or  alteration  in  the  text  of  a  play  may  be 
made,  either  before  or  after  production,  except  in  consulta- 
tion between  the  Producer  and  the  Director.     In  the  case  of 


70  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

an  original  modern  play,  the  author's  rights  in  this  matter — 
and  on  all  other  matters  concerning  the  production — will  of 
course  be  determined,  by  his  contract  with  the  Theatre. 

Some  authors  will  no  doubt  produce  their  own  plays.  In 
such  cases  they  might  either  be  treated  in  all  respects  as 
official  producers;  or  an  actor-producer  might  be  assigned  to 
them  as  advisory  assistant. 

The  Producer's  responsibility  for  a  play  does  not  end 
with  its  production.  He  must  if  possible  attend  any  extra 
rehearsals  occasioned  by  a  change  of  cast,  or  by  a  perfor- 
mance taking  place  after  an  interval  of  some  weeks.  He 
remains  until  the  end  of  the  season  artistically  in  charge  of 
a  play  which  he  has  produced. 

Understudy  rehearsals  would  be  conducted  by  the  Head- 
Prompter,  assisted  by  the  under-prompter  attached  to  the 
play.  It  would  be  the  Head-Prompter's  duty,  as  Librarian, 
to  have  in  charge,  after  production,  the  prompt  copies  and 
scene-models  of  a  play,  and  he  would  be  expected  to  make 
himself  acquainted  with  the  main  lines  of  its  business.  He 
should  be  able  to  conduct  a  plain  rehearsal  of  any  play  in 
the  repertory — such  a  rehearsal  as  would  give  a  newcomer  ease 
among  an  established  cast. 

There  should  be  one  full  understudy  rehearsal  of  every 
play,  which  the  Producer  of  the  play  should  attend. 

In  the  case  of  revivals  of  plays  performed  in  past  seasons, 
the  Producer  would  of  course  have  access  to  all  existing 
prompt-books.  He  must,  however,  create  a  prompt-book  of 
his  own,  which  will  be  endorsed  with  his  name,  and  will  re- 
main the  property  of  the  Theatre.  The  careful  and  intelligent 
marking  of  these  books  would  be  a  most  important  matter. 


SECTION  VII 


General  Expenses :  Scenery,  Dresses,  Lighting,  Advertising,  &c. 

Under  the  head  of  General  Expenses  we  include  all  items  of 
outlay,  both  before  and  behind  the  scenes,  which  do  not  take 
the  form  of  salaries,  and  are  chargeable  to  the  profit-and-loss 
account  of  the  Theatre.  It  will  be  remembered  that  rates,  taxes, 
insurance  premium,  and  the  cost  of  repairs  to  the  building,  fix- 
tures, furniture,  machinery,  &c.  (as  distinct  from  scenery  and 
properties  employed  on  the  stage),  are  assumed  to  be  covered 
by  the  endowment  of  the  Theatre.  They  are  met  (according  to 
our  scheme — see  Section  XII.)  by  the  interest  on  the  Guarantee 
Fund.  If  at  any  time  the  Guarantee  Fund  fell  so  low  that  the 
interest  on  it  did  not  cover  these  items  of  outlay,  the  deficit 
would  have  to  be  charged  to  the  General  Expenses. 


Geneeal  Expenses. 

Scenery  (materials  and  making)   , 
Furniture  and  Properties     .... 
Costumes : — 

Modern  Plays  (ladies'  dresses) 

Costume  Plays  (materials)     .         , 
Wigs  (contract)    ...... 

Electric  Light  (whole  house)  at  jC^o  a  week 
Electric  limes  (average  of  15'  lights,  at  i8s.  a  week 
Heating,  and  (if  necessary)  gas    . 
Advertising  ...... 

Printing  (repertory-lists  for  Subscribers,  window-bills, 
playbills,  booking-sheets,  and  tickets),  at  ;^i2  a  week 
Stationery  and  Petty  Cash  (postages,  &c.),at_;^2oa  week 
Special  Production  Expenses  (see  p.  xxi) 

Total 

7« 


each) 


838 

2,480 
960 

350 

1,500 

67s 

150 

2,500 

600 

1,000 

1.569 

•  ;>^i4,oSO 


72  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

Our  estimate  of  expenses  connected  with  scenery  may  seem 
surprisingly  low,  in  contrast  to  the  gigantic  outlay  which 
managers  are  said  to  incur  in  placing,  for  example,  a  great 
"  Shakespearean  revival "  on  the  stage.  There  is  generally 
some  exaggeration  in  these  rumours ;  but  it  is  no  doubt  pos- 
sible for  a  manager  to  spend  a  great  deal  of  money  in  having 
scenery  specially  built  and  painted,  by  contract,  for  each  new 
production  at  his  theatre — scenery  which  is  largely  unadaptable 
to  any  other  production,  and  unusable  on  any  other  stage  than 
his  own.  Storage,  too,  is  so  expensive  that,  unless  a  scene  is 
quite  certain  to  be  used  again  in  very  much  its  original  shape, 
it  does  not  pay  to  keep  it ;  and  the  result  is  that  a  large  propor- 
tion of  the  scenery  painted  in  London  to-day  is  sold,  after  its 
first  "  run  "  is  over,  for  its  value  in  wood  and  canvas.  But  this 
wasteful  method  is  not  that  actually  employed  at  the  most  suc- 
cessful theatres,  and  it  would  certainly  not  be  employed  at  the 
Theatre  we  are  outlining. 

Scenery  might  be  "  made,"  *  under  the  supervision  of  a  second 
Master  Carpenter,  in  workshops  belonging  to  the  Theatre ;  but 
it  is  doubtful  whether  this  would  mean  any  economy  upon  the 
contract  price  here  allowed  for.  It  would  be  painted  by  the 
regularly  employed  scene-room  staflF.  Moreover,  waste  would  be 
reduced  to  a  minimum  by  the  plan  of  building  to  certain  standard 
proportions  every  piece  of  scenery  and  every  "  rostrum  "  or  other 
structure  used  on  the  stage  (which  must  have  no  "  rake  "  in  it), 
thus  securing  great  interchangeability  of  parts.  In  the  course  of 
an  average  year's  working,  then,  at  least  as  much  labour  would 
probably  go  to  the  repainting  and  adapting  of  old  scenery  as  to 
the  manufacture  of  new.     It  is  quite  possible  to  have  scenery  of 

'  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  point  out  the  distinction  between  the  making  of  a  scene 
— its  construction  in  wood  and  canvas — and  the  painting  of  it. 


SCENERY  73 

great  beauty  and  perfect  appropriateness  without  having  recourse 
to  those  massive  and  costly  constructions  with  which  the  stage 
is  now  so  often  encumbered.  The  ideal  to  be  aimed  at  is  not 
that  the  disclosure  of  the  scene,  on  the  rise  of  the  curtain,  should 
be  greeted  with  "  Oh's  !  "  "  Ah's  !  "  and  rounds  of  applause, 
but  that,  as  the  action  progresses,  the  audience  should  feel, 
perhaps  subconsciously,  the  unobtrusive  harmony  of  the  scenic 
background. 

The  method  by  which  our  estimate  is  attained  is  this :  We 
have  calculated  the  number  of  scenes  necessary  for  the  mounting 
of  the  first  year's  repertory,  and  find  them  to  be  (approximately) 
eighty-six  full  sets  and  thirty  front  cloths.  The  cost  of  "  mak- 
ing "  (as  distinct  from  painting)  the  sets  would  vary  considerably, 
but  after  careful  inquiry  we  believe  that  we  may  fairly  average 
it  at  ;^6o  a  set ;  while  the  front  cloths  could  be  made  at  ^5  each. 
This  gives  us  a  total  of  ^5160  for  the  making  of  sets,  and  ;^I50 
for  the  making  of  cloths — in  all,  ;^53io.  Reckoning,  then,  the 
average  period  of  service  of  a  piece  of  scenery  at  four  years,  in 
order  to  find  the  annual  expense  of  "  making  "  sufficient  to  keep 
the  stock  up  to  this  level,  we  divide  ;^53io  by  4,  and  arrive  in 
round  numbers  at  the  sum  of  ;i^i328.  This  figure,  then,  repre- 
sents the  contract  cost  of  one  year's  construction  of  scenery. 
The  painting  is,  of  course,  provided  for  in  the  scene-room 
salaries  (.2^1050);  and  these  two  sums,  together  with  ;i{^ioo  for 
scene-room  materials  (paint,  size,  brushes,  &c.),  represent  the 
whole  annual  outlay  for  scenery — namely,  jC2^'/S. 

Our  estimate  for  costumes  was  a  somewhat  more  complex 
matter.  Here  we  had,  in  the  first  place,  to  distinguish  between 
the  costumes  for  "  costume  "  plays,  which  would  be  made  in  the 
Theatre,  and  ladies'  dresses  for  modem  plays,  which  would  not. 

Let  us  take  the  latter  first.     After  a  great  deal  of  discussion 


74  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

and  consultation  of  authorities,  we  determined,  in  this  as  in 
other  cases,  to  adopt  an  outside  estimate.  We  concluded  that 
the  ladies'  dresses  for  the  modem  new  plays  of  our  specimen 
season  might  be  set  down  at  ;i^iioo,  and  the  ladies'  dresses  for 
the  modern  revivals  at  ^2000,  making  ;^3ioo  in  all.  Then 
came  the  question  how  much  of  this  sum  would  be  chargeable 
to  the  current  expenses  of  a  normal  season.  In  order  to  answer 
this  question  we  had  to  estimate  the  value  of  the  dresses — not, 
of  course,  their  selling  value,  but  their  value  to  the  Theatre — 
after  a  season's  use.  Here,  again,  we  took  an  outside  estimate, 
and  concluded  that  they  would  be  depreciated  by  four-fifths,  or, 
in  other  words,  worth  only  one-fifth  of  what  they  had  cost.  On 
these  assumptions,  then,  the  amount  chargeable  to  a  single 
season  worked  out  at  ;i^248o. 

This  figure  we  put  down  rather  in  deference  to  criticism 
than  as  representing  our  own  judgment.  We  believe  that  both 
the  total  estimate  and  the  estimate  for  depreciation  are  too 
high.  For  this  particular  season,  indeed,  the  total  estimate  may 
not  be  excessive ;  but,  as  we  have  pointed  out  on  p.  42,  it  must 
be  remembered  that  in  this  season  the  drawing-room  play,  with 
its  lavish  millinery,  occupies  a  much  larger  space  than  it  pro- 
bably would  in  a  normal  season,  after  the  Theatre  had  been 
some  years  at  work.  Drawing-room  plays,  both  new  and  re- 
vived, would  no  doubt  continue  to  hold  a  certain  place  in  the 
repertory ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  many  modern  plays  would 
be  produced  (and  in  course  of  time  revived)  which  not  only 
might,  but  must,  be  quite  inexpensively  dressed.  Again,  as  to 
depreciation,  it  is  of  course  true  that  the  remaking  and  adapting 
which  are  possible  in  the  case  of  historical  costumes  are  prac- 
tically impossible  in  the  case  of  modem  dresses.  But  a  con- 
siderable number  of  dresses  could  certainly  be  carried  forward. 


COSTUMES  75 

unaltered,  from  one  season  to  the  next.  In  our  specimen 
season,  for  instance,  The  Importance  of  being  Earnest  is  re- 
vived and  acted  5  times.  Suppose  that  the  Director  put  it  up 
again  for  5  or  10  performances  in  the  following  season — is  it 
to  be  imagined  that  he  could  not  do  so  without  re-dressing 
it?  Dowdiness  or  shabbiness  of  costume  would,  of  course,  be 
out  of  the  question ;  but  it  would  soon  come  to  be  understood 
that,  while  new  productions  of  the  drawing-room  order  would 
be  "  gowned "  in  the  latest  mode,  modern  plays  which  formed 
part  of  the  current  repertory  would  not  be  re-gowned  season  by 
season,  in  exact  observance  of  every  fluctuation  of  fashion.  It 
would  be  part  of  the  Director's  business  to  decide  when  the 
costumes  in  a  modern  play  had  (apart  from  wear  and  tear) 
become  so  obsolete  as  to  require  renewal. 

For  these  reasons  we  believe  that  our  total  estimate  for 
modem  dresses  might  be  considerably  reduced  for  the  purposes 
of  a  normal  season,  and  that  the  depreciation  might  fairly  be 
put  down  at  two-thirds  instead  of  four-fifths. 

As  regards  historical  costumes  (to  be  made  in  the  Theatre) 
our  method  was  this  :  we  obtained  an  estimate  for  the  costumes 
required  in  all  the  old  plays  of  our  specimen  season,  supposing 
them  to  be  made  by  contract  under  present  conditions,  though 
not,  of  course,  with  the  profuse  employment  of  costly  materials 
which  characterises  a  long-run  spectacular  revival.  The  estimate 
amounted  to  /8860.  From  this  we  deducted  25  per  cent. 
(^2215),  as  representing  the  maker's  profit,  thus  leaving  ^6645. 
From  this  again  we  deducted  ^2895,  being  our  informant's 
estimate  for  the  labour  employed  in  making  these  costumes. 
There  remained,  then,  a  sum  of  /3750,  representing  the  cost 
of  material.  We  now  assumed  that,  taking  one  style  with 
another,  there  would  be,  on  an  average,  four  years'  service  in 


76  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

the  costumes.  Accordingly  we  divided  by  four  the  cost  of 
the  materials  required  for  our  opening  season,  and  arrived 
at  ;^96o  as  an  approximate  estimate  of  the  yearly  outlay 
for  materials  required  in  costume  plays.  The  expense  of 
making  these  costumes  is  of  course  represented  in  the  salaries 
of  the  Wardrobe  Staff  in  our  estimate  of  expenses  "  Behind 
the  Scenes." 

Our  allowance  for  furniture  and  properties  we  arrived  at 
by  estimating  the  total  cost  of  the  furniture  and  properties 
required  for  the  specimen  season  (^4704),  and  assuming  eight 
years  to  be  the  average  working  life  of  an  article  of  furniture. 
This  we  believe  to  be  a  low  estimate,  allowing  a  large  margin 
for  the  cost  of  repairs.  One-eighth  of  ^4704,  or  ^^588,  was 
therefore  the  sum  chargeable  to  a  normal  season ;  and  to 
this  we  added  a  "  property  bill "  of  ^5  a  week  for  sundry 
materials  and  consumables,  making  ;^838  in  all.* 

Our  estimate  for  advertising — practically  ;i^50  a  week — we 
believe  to  be  ample.  As  before  remarked,  such  an  institution 
as  this  ought  to  be — and  must  be,  if  it  is  to  succeed — in  great 

'  In  a  footnote  on  p.  6,  ;^20,ooo  is  put  down  as  the  probable  cost  of  the  initial 
stock  which  the  Donor  would  have  to  provide.     That  sum  is  arrived  at  as  follows : — 

Scenery. — Our  estimate  for  the  "making"  of  the  whole  scenery  for  the  opening 
season  is  ;^53io.  To  this  we  add  ^3000  as  a  probable  estimate  for  the  cost  of  paint- 
ing, thus  finding  the  whole  cost  of  making  and  painting  the  first  season's  scenery  to 
work  out  at  ;if83io.  From  this,  then,  we  deduct  ;£2478,  being  our  estimate  for  scene- 
room  salaries  and  cost  of  "  making"  during  a  normal  season,  and  arrive  at  jCS^j'^i  ^ 
the  cost  of  the  scenery  which  the  Donor  would  have  to  supply  in  order  to  place  the 
opening  season  on  the  financial  footing  of  an  ordinary  year. 

Costumes. — The  ladies'  modem  dresses  for  the  whole  season  are  estimated  to  cost 
^3100,  and  four-fifths  of  that  sum  is  reckoned  as  chargeable  to  the  current  expenses  of 
a  normal  season.  Therefore,  one-fifth  (^620)  has  to  be  .supplied  by  the  Donor.  The 
price  of  historical  costumes  for  the  opening  season  is  estimated  at  ^8860,  from  which 
we  deduct  ^960,  being  the  cost  of  materials  for  a  normal  season,  and  ;{^i885,  being  the 
wardrobe-department  salaries  for  a  normal  season,  thus  arriving  at  ^6015  as  the  pro- 
portion chargeable  to  the  Donor. 

Properties. — The  whole  estimate  for  furniture  and  properties  for  the  opening  season 


ADVERTISEMENT  77 

measure  its  own  advertisement.  It  must  stand  out  from  its 
surroundings  and  attract  attention  in  virtue  of  its  inherent 
dignity  and  largeness  of  design.  It  would  not  be  one  of  a 
crowd  of  entertainment-houses  clamorously  over-bidding  one 
another  for  popular  favour.  Its  aim  in  advertising  should  not 
be  to  obtrude  itself  upon  the  notice  of  the  casual  newspaper- 
reader,  but  to  afford  readily  accessible  information  as  to  its 
doings  for  all  who  choose  to  look  for  it.  We  may  also  point 
out  that  the  proposed  subscription  system  (Appendix  C),  by 
which  notifications  of  the  repertory  for  two  weeks  ahead  would 
every  week  be  forwarded  to  subscribers,  would  in  itself  be  an 
eflFective  form  of  advertising. 

came  to  £,^^o^.  From  this  we  deduct  one-eighth  as  the  proportion  chargeable  to  a 
normal  season,  and  find  ^41 16  to  be  provided  by  the  Donor. 

Thus  the  outlay  necessary  to  place  the  opening  season  on  the  financial  footing  of  a 
normal  season  would  be : — 

Scenery £'i^^Tfl 

Ladies'  modern  dresses 620 

Historical  costumes 6,015 

Properties,  &o. 4)ii6 

Total        ....  ^£16,583 

There  would  also  be  musical  instruments  to  be  provided  for  use  on  the  sfcige  (pianos, 
harmonium,  small  organ,  &c.,  &c.),  and  perhaps  some  specially  costly  pieces  of  armour 
and  historical  properties.  Therefore  we  think  ^20,000  a  probable  estimate  for  the 
cost  of  the  initial  stock. 


SECTION    VIII 


The  Auditorium — Seat  Capacity  and  Money  Capacity — Prices — 
Subscription  (Abonnement)  System. 

The  seating  capacity  of  the  Theatre,  with  its  correlative 
money-containing  capacity,  is  a  very  important  matter  to  be 
considered.  The  enterprise  might  be  seriously  handicapped, 
or  even  ruined,  by  a  too  large  or  too  small  auditorium. 

In  order  to  afford  a  basis  for  comparisons,  we  here  give  a 
tabular  statement  of  the  seating  [capacity  of  several  well-known 
London  theatres : — 


Drury  Lane 

Adelphi  (before  reconstruction) 

Shaftesbury 

Duke  of  York's 

New  Theatre 

St.  James's  . 

Prince  of  Wales's 

Avenue 

Comedy 

Savoy . 

Haymarket . 

Vaudeville  . 


3500 
2300 

1800 

1300 

1264 

1260 

1 200 

1200 

1185 

1150 

1 100 

1000 


It  appears,  then,  that  the  seating  capacity  of  a  medium- 
sized  London  theatre  of  to-day  ranges  from  iioo  to  1300.  The 
Shaftesbury,  indeed,  which  is  not  an  extravagantly  large  house, 
seats  1 800,  and  the  Adelphi  over  2000 ;  but  each  of  these 
theatres  contains  a  large  pit  and  gallery  in  which  the  audience 

can  be  much  more  tightly  packed  than  it  would  be  in  even  the 

78 


THE   AUDITORIUM  79 

cheapest  seats  of  the  National  Theatre,  while  many  of  the  seats 
probably  command  but  an  indifferent  view  of  the  stage. 

Taking  these  things  into  account,  we  had  originally  placed 
the  seating  capacity  of  the  Theatre  here  outlined  at  1350;  but 
more  than  one  critic  of  very  high  authority  urged  us  to  recon- 
sider and  increase  this  estimate.  "The  Theatre,"  we  were 
told,  "  must  be  in  a  position  to  '  make  hay  while  the  sun  shines,' 
or,  in  other  words,  to  take  the  fullest  advantage  of  the  first 
flush  of  popularity  attending  a  successful  production.  When  a 
play  hits  the  popular  fancy,  it  is  always  found  that,  during  the 
first  few  weeks,  crowds  of  people  have  to  be  turned  away,  many 
of  whom  do  not  come  back  again.  In  this  Theatre,  in  which 
the  number  of  performances  a  play  can  attain  is  strictly  limited, 
it  is  all  the  more  necessary  that,  in  the  case  of  a  success,  this 
limited  number  of  performances  should  be  as  fruitful  as  possible. 
The  classical  repertory  will  have  to  be  supported  largely  upon 
the  profits  made  by  successful  modern  plays ;  therefore  the 
Theatre  must  be  large  enough  to  leave  a  very  wide  margin  of 
profit  on  such  productions." 

That  the  classical  repertory  must  live  on  the  modem  plays, 
we  do  not  admit ;  but  otherwise  we  agree  with  this  reasoning. 
The  only  question  is  how  far  the  capacity  of  the  auditorium 
may  be  extended  without  rendering  it  too  large  for  clear  sight, 
easy  hearing,  and  a  sense  of  intimate  relationship  between 
the  actor  and  the  audience.*  This  is  an  architectural  problem, 
to  be  solved  only  by    experiment ;  but  on  careful  inquiry  we 

'  It  must  be  remembered,  too,  that  a  house  with  accommodation  for  a  great  many 
more  people  than  the  average  audience  it  can  hope  to  attract,  seems  emptier  than  it 
really  is  when  the  audience  falls  below  the  average:  so  that  even  a  fairly  remunerative 
audience  may  be  so  sparsely  scattered  as  to  look,  and  feel,  like  a  depressingly  "bad 
house."  The  system  of  obviating  this  inconvenience  by  "  papering  "  the  house  would 
of  course  be  rigorously  excluded  at  the  National  Theatre. 


8o  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

are  disposed  to  accept  the  view  that  our  original  estimate  was 
too  low.  Everything  depends  upon  the  skill  of  the  designer. 
Some  theatres  which  seem  enormous  seat  comparatively  few 
people ;  others,  which  seat  a  large  number,  seem  compact  and 
comfortable.  One  point  is  certain :  namely,  that  the  Theatre 
must  be  designed  primarily  for  modern  plays.  It  is  possible  to 
fit  a  Shakespearean  production  into  a  house  adapted  for  modern 
drama  ;  it  is  impossible  to  give  modem  drama  its  proper  effect 
in  a  theatre  primarily  designed  for  spectacular  productions. 

If  we  look  abroad  for  guidance  the  evidence  is  a  little 
difficult  of  interpretation.  We  have  not  exact  information  as 
to  the  French  theatres,  but  we  have  reason  to  believe  that 
neither  the  Th^atre-Frangais  nor  the  Od^on  can  seat  more 
than  1 200  spectators.  These  seem  to  the  eye  very  large 
theatres ;  their  comparatively  small  capacity  is  probably  due 
to  the  fact  that  their  galleries  are  verj'  shallow.  A  large  part 
of  each  gallery,  in  fact,  is  given  up  to  boxes,  in  which  the 
spectators  cannot  sit  more  than  two  deep.  For  the  same  reason 
the  Burgtheater  in  Vienna  looks  large  in  proportion  to  its 
seating  capacity,  which  is  1474.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
Deutsches  Volkstheater  of  Vienna,  a  most  commodious  theatre 
where  every  class  of  play  is  performed,  accommodates  the  aston- 
ishing number  of  1873  spectators.  We  say  "accommodates,"' 
not  "  seats,"  for  the  "  Stehparterre  "  or  "  standing-pit "  is  an 
institution  in  this,  as  in  many  other  Austrian  theatres,  a  special 
price  being  charged  for  "  standing-room  only."  But  even  if  we 
deduct  200  for  standing-room  (a  large  conjecture)  there  remain 
over  1650  comfortable  and  roomy  seats.  Among  other  Viennese 
theatres,  the  Eaimund-Theater  accommodates  1607  spectators, 
and  the  Kaiserjubilaums  -  Stadttheater  1885.  The  Neues 
Deutsches  Theater  in  Prague,  a  house  of  no  inordinate  dimen- 


SEAT-CAPACITY  8i 

sions,  contains  1800  places.  The  National  Theatre  in  Christiania 
— an  admirable  house  both  for  modern  and  historical  drama — 
accommodates  1400  people  with  the  utmost  comfort.  In  most 
of  these  theatres — indeed  we  believe  in  all — the  galleries  are  of 
inconsiderable  depth,  the  system  of  carrying  them  well  forward, 
so  as  to  bring  a  large  proportion  of  the  audience  comparatively 
close  to  the  stage,  being  little  practised  on  the  Continent. 

We  believe  then,  on  reconsideration,  that  it  would  be  possible 
to  design  a  house — with  deep  galleries  well  brought  forward, 
and  with  a  moderate  proscenium  opening — which  might,  without 
seeming  unduly  vast  or  cavernous,  accommodate  from  1550  to 
1600  spectators. 

Let  us  assume  that  1550*  represents  the  utmost  capa- 
city of  the  Theatre.  Our  next  step  is  to  exclude  from 
our  calculations  the  odd  50  places.  It  is  probable  that  there 
would  be  a  certain  number  of  boxes  which  would  contain 
the  most  expensive  seats  in  the  house ;  but  until  the  Theatre 
is  actually  designed  we  must  leave  this  feature  in  doubt 
Furthermore,  there  would  have  to  be  a  certain,  though  strictly 
limited,  number  of  free  admissions,  for  students  of  the  Training 
School,  members  of  the  company  not  employed  in  the  per- 
formance in  progress,  &c.,  &c.  On  first  nights,  too,  free  seats 
might  ^  have  to  be  allotted  to  the  Press.     These  50  seats,  then, 

•  One  eminent  authority  who  has  examined  our  scheme  is  of  opinion  that  the  house 
might,  without  inconvenience,'be  so  constructed  as  to  hold,  at  full  prices,  £^70  or 
£2,^0,  instead  of  the  ^345  allowed  for  in  this  estimate.  The  addition  of  icxj  six- 
shilling  seats  would  bring  the  capacity  of  the  house,  at  full  prices,  up  to  ^375,  and  at 
"ordinary"  rates  (as  explained  below,  p.  86)  from  /301,  12s.  up  to  ^328,  5s.  This 
would  certainly  make  a  great  differencejn  the  yearly  balance-sheet,  and  it  is  not  at 
all  inconceivable  that  an  otherwise]  suitable  theatre  might  be  designed  which  should 
hold  an  audience  of  1650.  We  do  not  feel  sufficiently  confident  of  this  to  make  it  a 
basis  of  calculation  ;  but  see  footnote,  p.  108. 

2  We  say  "might,"  for  we  believe  that  at  this  Theatre  it  might  be  possible  to 
introduce  a  more  satisfactory  system  than  that  of  free  admissions  for  the  theatrical 

F 


82 


NATIONAL  THEATRE 


we  assume  to  be  partly  box  seats,  partly  free  seats.  In  so  far 
as  they  may  be  box  seats,  they  leave  a  margin  to  the  good 
in  our  calculations. 

There  remain  1500  seats  to  be  disposed  of,  and  for  the 
purposes  of  this  calculation  we  reckon  the  "  House  Full "  when 
these  1500  seats  are  all  sold.  A  probable  apportionment  of 
them  might  be  as  follows  : — 


Stalls  (occupying  the  whole  floor  of  the  house) — 


Front  Rows 

300 

seats. 

Back  Rows        , 

150 

tf 

First  Circle — 

Front  Rows 

200 

Back  Rows 

200 

Second  Cucle — 

Front  Rows 

ISC- 

Back  Rows 

ISO 

Third  Circle 

Front  Rows 

, 

15° 

Back  Rows  (Gallery) 

200 

Total     .         .         .   1500 

J) 

critics.     Under  present  conditions 

it  is  ve 

ry  difficult 

for  a 

critic, 

be  he  never  so 

willing,  to  pay  for  his  seat,  seeing  that  first-night  places  do  not  come  into  the  market, 
or  can  at  best  be  secured  with  great  trouble.  Exorbitant  prices,  too,  stand  in  the 
way  of  the  admittedly  healthier  system  by  which  the  critic  should  pay  for  his  seat. 
Takini;  a  hint  from  Vienna,  we  suggest  that  at  the  National  Theatre  a  special  seat 
should  be  allotted  to  every  paper  on  the  Press  list,  and  that  the  critic  of  that  paper 
should  always  be  able  to  secure  its  special  seat  by  sending  in  an  application  before  a 
certain  stated  time,  accompanied  by  the  subscription  price  of  the  place — which,  as 
hereafter  explained,  would  be  63.  if  it  be  in  the  front  rows  of  the  stalls,  5s.  if  it  he 
in  the  back  rows  of  the  stalls  or  front  rows  of  the  first  circle.  As  there  would  be 
about  twenty-three  important  first  nights  in  the  season,  this  would  mean  that  a  critic's 
attendance  at  all  of  them  would  cost  his  paper  either  £,(>,  i8s.  or  ^5,  15s.  It  is 
probable  that  a  few  critics  would  want  to  follow  the  performances  of  the  Theatre 
very  closely,  as  Francisque  Sarcey  followed  those  of  the  Thciatre-Franfais,  and  would 
attend  not  only  on  first  nights  but  on  many  others  as  well.  It  would  of  course  be 
competent  for  the  Director,  recognising  the  services  such  a  critic  may  render  the 
Theatre,  to  place  him  on  the  free  list  for  ordinary  nights,  as  distinct  from  first  nights. 


PRICES  83 

It  is  beyond  question  that  the  prices  at  the  National 
Theatre  ought  to  be  considerably  lower  than  those  which  at 
present  prevail  in  the  West  End  of  London.  Experiments  in 
the  direction  of  lower  prices  have  not  hitherto  succeeded, 
because  they  have  been  made  at  theatres  which  had  somehow 
or  other  fallen  into  bad  odour,  and  have  always  been  associated 
with  inferior  entertainments.  They  have  been  a  last  resource 
against  failure,  and  an  ineflFectual  one.  So  distinctly  do 
theatres  lose  caste  when  prices  are  lowered,  that  in  most 
leases  there  is  a  clause  forbidding  any  such  reduction.  The 
half-guinea  stall,  however,  is  a  product  of  the  long-run 
system,  and  can  maintain  its  ground  only  at  long-run  theatres. 
People  will  face  high  prices  in  order  to  see  a  play  that  is  in 
vogue,  that  is  "run  upon";  even  if  they  dislike  it,  they  have 
the  satisfaction  of  being  able  to  say  so  with  authority.  But 
unless  they  know  that  all  the  world  is  flocking  to  a  play,  they 
will  not  pay  half  a  guinea  (or  other  sums  in  proportion)  in 
order  to  find  out  for  themselves  whether  it  is  or  is  not  to  their 
taste.  High  prices,  then,  are  among  the  chief  reasons  why 
there  is  seldom  any  medium,  under  present  conditions,  between 
huge  success  and  total  failure.  But  the  experiment  has  never 
been  tried  of  starting  at  moderate  prices  a  new  theatre,  quite 
obviously  of  the  first  rank.  We  are  not  sure  that  even  in 
the  case  of  a  long-run  theatre  the  policy  might  not  prove  a 
sound  one.  For  a  repertory  theatre,  at  any  rate,  it  is  essential. 
It  must  not  rely  upon  "rushes"  anymore  than  it  relies  upon 
"  runs."  To  the  great  body  of  its  public  it  must  be  a  place 
of  habitual  resort,  not  merely  a  place  to  be  visited,  at  cost  of 
much  trouble,  discomfort,  and  money,  when  some  particular 
entertainment  happens  to  be  so  much  in  vogue  as  to  supply  a 
motive  for  disregarding  these  drawbacks.      The  present  scale 


84 


NATIONAL  THEATRE 


of  prices  means  large  profits  in  the  case  of  a  successful  new 
play,  or  spectacular  revival,  while  at  the  height  of  its  vogue ; 
but  in  the  absence  of  such  special  attractions,  it  undoubtedly 
tends  to  keep  people  out  of  the  theatres.  Now,  at  the  National 
Theatre  there  would  be  no  spectacular  revivals ;  and  though 
there  would  no  doubt  be  new  plays  which  people  would  be 
eager  to  see  even  at  high  prices,  they  would  not  constitute 
the  bulk  of  the  repertory,  nor  would  it  be  reasonable  to  fix 
the  scale  of  prices  with  a  special  view  to  such  pieces  as  were 
likely  to  be  in  exceptionally  keen  demand.  It  has  been 
suggested  that  two  or  three  rows  of  stalls  should  be  sold  at 
the  current  half-guinea  rate.  But  which  rows  ?  Certainly  not 
those  nearest  the  stage,  for  they  are  not  the  most  desirable. 
Nor  would  it  seem  feasible  to  charge  half  a  guinea  for  a  strip  of 
three  rows  in  the  middle  of  the  stalls,  while  the  rows  in  front 
and  behind  were  sold  at  7s.  6d.  In  short,  we  are  firm  in  our 
belief  that  a  general  reduction  of  prices  is  the  true  policy  for 
this  Theatre. 

The  following  table  shows  the  prices  which  we  suggest  as 
reasonable,  and  the  receipts  which  they  would  produce : — 


Stalls- 

FULL  PRICES. 

Front  Rows 
Back  Rows 
First  Circle — 

300  seats  at  7s. 
150       „       6a. 

6d. 

£ 

112 

45 

10 

0 

Front  Rows 

200  seats  at  6s. 

60 

0 

Back  Rows 
Second  Circle — 

,     200        „       5s. 

5° 

0 

Front  Rows 
Back  Rows 
Third  Circle- 

150  seats  at  4s. 
150         „          2S. 

6d. 

30 
18 

0 
0 

Front  Rows 
Back  Rows  (G 

allery) 

150  seats  at  2s. 

200          ,,          IS. 

Total     . 

6d. 

18 
10 

IS 
0 

£ 

u.s 

0 

SUBSCRIPTION   SYSTEM  85 

Thus  the  full  capacity  of  the  house  (boxes  apart)  at  full 
prices  would  be  ;!^345.  But  only  on  comparatively  rare  occasions 
would  all  the  seats  be  sold  at  full  prices. 

,  On  ordinary  nights,  according  to  the  system  fully  set  forth 
in  Appendix  C,  the  greater  number  of  places  would  probably 
be  sold  at  subscription  (abonnement)  prices.  Under  the  German 
abonnement  system,  the  "  Abonnent  "  usually  buys  a  certain 
seat  for  a  fixed  series  of  evenings — say  every  Friday  throughout 
the  season,  or  every  second  Monday,  or  whatever  the  arrange- 
ment may  be.  We  do  not  believe  that  this  arrangement 
would  be  practicable  in  London,  except  in  special  cases.  We 
suggest  that  there  should  be,  during  part  of  the  season  at 
any  rate,  a  series  of  fashionable  Thursday  evenings  (like  the 
"Mardis"  of  the  Thdatre-Francais),  for  which  people  should 
engage  a  particular  seat  or  group  of  seats  at  full  rates,^  knowing 
that  the  Theatre  would  on  these  evenings  be  the  rendezvous 
of  their  "  set,"  and  of  course  expecting  a  different  play  to  be 
presented  on  each  evening  of  the  series.  But  these  "  special 
subscription  "  evenings  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  ordinary 
subscription  system  which  we  would  propose  to  introduce. 
This  is  founded  on  the  common  principle  of  "  a  reduction  on 
taking  a  quantity."  Every  one  buying  ten  places  at  a  time 
would  save  from  one-and-sixpence  to  sixpence  on  each  place. 
For  details  of  the  system  we  refer  the  reader  to  the  Appendix 
(p.  140).  In  the  meantime,  we  proceed  to  calculate  the  capacity 
of  the  house  on  the  assumption  that  one-third  of  the  seats 
are  sold  at  full  rates  and  two-thirds  at  subscription  rates  : — 


'  It  might  even  be  found  that  people  were  willing  to  pay  advanced  rates — say,  the 
current  theatrical  prices  of  to-day — for  these  special  subscription  seats.  It  would 
simply  be  a  question  of  supply  and  demand.  There  would  be  no  objection  in 
principle  to  advancing  the  prices  for  these  particular  evenings. 


86 


NATIONAL  THEATRE 


"ORDINARY"  PRICES. 


Stalls- 

Front  Rows 

100  seats  at  7s. 

6d. 

£?,! 

10 

0 

Back  Bows 

200        „        6s. 
50        „        6s. 

60 
IS 

0 
0 

0 
0 

First  Circle- 

100        „       ss. 

25 

0 

0 

Front  Rows 

66  seats  at  6s. 

19 

16 

0 

Back  Rows 

134       ..       SS. 
66       „        5s. 

33 
16 

10 
10 

0 
0 

Second  Circle — 

134        ..        48. 

26 

16 

0 

Front  Rows 

50  seats  at  4s. 

10 

0 

0 

1)        ))               •         • 
Back  Rows 

100        „        3s. 

50           „            2S. 

6d. 

15 
6 

0 
5 

0 
0 

Third  Circle- 

100            „            2S. 

10 

0 

0 

Front  Rows 

50  seats  at  2  s. 

6d. 

6 

5 

0 

)»        »»               •         • 
Back    Rows    (Gallery),    n( 
subscription  price'    . 

100           „            2S. 
200           „           IS. 

Total     . 

10 
10 

0 
0 

0 
0 

-=£■301 

12 

0 

This  sum — ;^30i,  12s. — may  be  regarded  as  the  receipt  of 
the  normal  full  house  on  ordinary  occasions.  Only  on  sixty 
occasions  in  each  season  is  the  Director  authorised  to  "  suspend 
the  subscription"  and  sell  all  seats  at  their  full  price.  This 
number  (about  one-sixth  of  the  whole  number  of  performances) 
is  calculated  so  as  to  allow  of  full  prices  being  charged,  not 
only  on  all  important  first-nights,  but  for  the  first  few  per- 
formances of  certain  new  plays  or  revivals,  and  on  special 
occasions  such  as  royal  "command"  nights  and  the  like.  The 
wise  Director  would  show  his  wisdom  in  a  judicious  use  of  this 
right  to  "  suspend  the  subscription,"  so  as  to  reap  the  full 
benefit  of  it  without  irritating  or  alienating  the  regular  sub- 
scribers. 


MONEY-CAPACITY 


87 


The  assumption  that,  on  ordinary  nights,  one-third  of  the 
seats  would  be  sold  at  full  rates  and  two-thirds  at  subscription 
rates  is  grounded  on  a  rule  to  be  hereafter  stated  (Appendix  C, 
Rule  5),  but  is  nevertheless  quite  hypothetical.  It  might  not 
infrequently  happen  that  more  than  two-thirds  of  the  seats  were 
sold  at  subscription  prices.  Supposing  the  whole  house  to 
be  sold  at  subscription  rates,  the  receipts  would  work  out  as 
follows : — 

SUBSCRIPTION  PRICES  ALONE. 

Stalls 

11  ... 

First  Circle  Seats 

Second  Circle  Seats 

)>  »)  • 

Third  Circle  Seats     , 
Gallery      .         .         . 

Total    .         .         .     ;i^277    10 

Again,  a  certain  number  of  educational  and  other  special 
performances  (we  have  placed  the  maximum  at  fifteen)  would 
be  given  in  each  season  at  largely  reduced  prices.  On  these 
occasions  the  full  receipt  would  be  : — 


300  seats  at  6s. 

£90 

0 

15°        . 

,        Ss- 

35 

0 

200        , 

53- 

5° 

0 

200        , 

4S. 

40 

0 

150        1 

,        38- 

22 

10 

150        . 

,            2S. 

IS 

0 

150 

,            2S. 

15 

0 

200        , 

,           IS. 

10 

0 

REDUCED  PRICES. 


Stalls      . 

300 

seats  at 

4S. 

£60 

0 

i)                •               •               • 

150 

3S. 

22 

10 

First  Circle  Seats    . 

200 

33- 

3° 

0 

J)           )j 

200 

2S. 

20 

0 

Second  Circle  Seats 

300 

IS. 

15 

0 

Third  Circle  Seats   . 

150 

IS. 

7 

10 

Gallery    . 

200 

6d. 

5 

0 

Total 


;£l60 


88  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

These  are,  of  course,  maximum  calculations,  and  we  are  far 
from  assuming  that  the  Theatre  could  always  look  for  maximum 
receipts.  A  discussion  of  reasonable  probabilities  under  this 
head  will  be  found  in  Section  XI. 

The  lack  of  a  pit  in  the  Theatre  here  forecast  will  probably 
be  held  a  defect.  But  the  pit  is  really  a  survival  from  a  bygone 
order  of  things,  and  would  enormously  complicate  the  architec- 
tural problem.  The  abolition  of  the  pit  at  the  Haymarket  Theatre 
in  no  way  impairs  the  attractiveness  of  that  very  popular  house. 
Our  scheme  provides  300  seats  at  the  pit  price  of  2s.  6d.,  or, 
according  to  our  subscription  system  (Appendix  C),  2s.  to  pur- 
chasers of  ten  seats  at  a  time.  The  pit  at  His  Majesty's  Theatre 
seats  only  190, 


SECTION    IX 

Relation  of  the  Theatre  to  Living  Authors — Royalties. 

We  have  calculated  at  lo  per  cent,  the  royalty  to  be  paid  to  the 
authors  of  new  plays,  that  being  also  the  percentage  deducted 
from  the  receipts  of  non-copyright  plays,  for  the  benefit  of  the 
Pension  Fund  (see  Appendix  B).  It  is  not  intended  to  lay  down 
a  fixed  rule  as  to  the  royalties  payable  to  living  authors.  They 
would  be  the  subject  of  special  agreement  in  each  individual 
case.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  a  "  sliding  scale  "  would  probably  be 
adopted  in  most  cases ;  but  calculations  on  this  basis  would  be 
far  too  complicated  for  a  discussion  such  as  the  present.  We 
believe  that  lo  per  cent,  ought  to  be,  and  would  be,  about 
the  average  —  a  more  advantageous  rate,  we  may  add,  than 
is  commonly  commanded,  except  by  authors  of  the  highest 
standing. 

Let  us  see,  then,  what  a  successful  play  would  be  likely  to 
earn  in  a  season.  In  that  which  we  have  outlined,  two  new 
plays  are  notably  successful,  one  being  acted  thirty-nine  times 
and  the  other  forty-three  times.  Supposing,  as  we  fairly  may, 
that  the  first  thirty  performances  of  each  of  these  plays  (from 
three  to  six  of  which  would  be  given  with  "  subscription  sus- 
pended ")  drew  an  average  sum  equivalent  to  full  houses  at  the 
"ordinary"  rates  (two-thirds  of  the  house,  that  is  to  say,  being 
occupied  by  subscribers,  and  one-third  by  non-subscribers  pay- 
ing  the  full  price  for  their    seats),  this    would   mean    lo   per 

cent,  on  ^300  for  thirty  nights,  or    ^900.     After   the   thirty 

89 


go  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

performances  we  suppose  the  receipts  to  drop  oflF — say,  to  an 
average  of  ;^200.  In  that  case  the  author  of  the  one  play 
would  have  ;^i8o  (nine  performances  at  an  average  royalty  of 
;£2o)  to  add  to  his  total  earnings  ;  while  the  author  of  the  other 
play  would  receive  an  additional  ;^26o  (thirteen  performances 
at  the  same  average  royalty).  Thus  one  author  would  receive 
;^io8o,  and  the  other  ^i  i6o,  in  all. 

Supposing,  now,  that  the  latter  author,  whose  play  was  per- 
formed forty-three  times,  had  been  able  to  command  a  percentage 
higher  than  the  average — say,  1 2^  per  cent. — his  total  receipts 
for  that  season  would  be  ^1450.^ 

There  would  remain  to  each  author,  of  course,  the  provincial, 
American,  and  foreign  rights  of  his  play — to  say  nothing  of  the 
certainty  that  a  play  which  had  proved  very  successful  in  one 
season  would  be  repeated  in  the  following  season,  and  the  pro- 
bability that  it  might  pass  into  the  permanent  repertory  of  the 
Theatre,  and  become  a  "  stock  piece,"  seldom  absent  from  the 
bills  for  many  weeks  at  a  stretch.*^ 

'  It  is,  of  course,  not  at  all  improbable  that  the  great  success  of  a  season  might 
attain  a  much  larger  number  of  performances — seventy  or  eighty.  In  the  latter  case, 
on  the  assumption  of  seventy  performances  at  an  average  receipt  of  ;^30o,  and  ten  at 
an  average  receipt  of  ;£200,  the  author's  whole  earnings,  on  a  lo  per  cent,  royalty, 
would  be  ;£23oo,  while  on  a  I2i  per  cent,  royalty  they  would  be  ;£2875. 

It  may  be  well  to  calculate  what  the  authors  of  the  less  successful  plays  of  our 
specimen  season  would  receive.  One  play  has  ten  performances.  Supposing  five  of 
them  to  produce  an  average  of  ^250,  and  the  remainder  an  average  of  ^150,  the  author 
would  receive  at  10  per  cent,  just  ;{^20o.  Another  is  performed  eight  times — four  per- 
formances at  ^250  and  four  at  ^150,  would  put  ^160  in  the  author's  pocket.  The 
remaining  new  play  is  performed  only  four  times.  Let  us  assume  that  it  is  a  play  by 
an  unknown  author,  full  of  promise  which  deserves  encouragement,  but  obviously  un- 
likely to  succeed.  The  management  might  produce  it,  in  order  to  bring  the  author's 
name  before  the  public  and  give  him  a  start,  but  might  allow  him  no  more  than  7^^  per 
cent.  Every  new  play  could  count  on  at  least  one  nearly  full  house  at  full  prices  ;  so  we 
may  reckon  the  receipts  of  this  play's  four  nights  at  ^^340,  ^250,  ^140,  ^70,  on  which 
the  royaltii-'s  would  amount  to  ^60 — no  such  contemptible  remuneration  for  a  beginner 

-  The  general  practice  of  the  Theatre  would  probably  be  to  stipulate  for  the 
exclusive  London  rights  in  a  play  so  long  as  it  chose  to  retain  it  in  ita  repertory.     It 


AUTHORS'    FEES  91 

To  most  men  of  letters — to  most  artists  or  professional  men 
— such  remuneration  as  even  the  less  successful  of  our  two 
authors  would  receive  for  a  single  play,  in  a  single  season,  at  a 
single  theatre,  would  seem  by  no  means  despicable.  But  we  are 
far  from  pretending  that  even  the  ^1450  netted  by  the  more 
successful  and  more  highly  remunerated  author  will  bear  any 
comparison  with  the  sum  which  a  dramatist  of  the  first  rank 
expects  to  clear  by  a  successful  play  at  a  long-run  theatre.  Is 
there  any  likelihood,  then,  that  the  National  Theatre  would  be 
able  to  induce  these  dramatists  to  work  for  it  ? 

Yes,  there  is  every  likelihood  that  it  would  secure  their  best 
work.  It  is  becoming  more  and  more  evident  that,  while  there 
is  a  large  public  for  the  strongest  and  most  serious  plays  of  our 
living  dramatists,  it  is  not  what  may  be  called  a  three-hundred 
night  public — nay,  it  is  barely  a  hundred-night  public.  Only 
by  some  rare  chance — such,  for  example,  as  the  sudden  vogue  of 
some  brilliant  performer — does  a  play  of  the  highest  class  ever 
attain  one  of  those  huge  successes  which  entirely  throw  into  the 
shade  the  modest  figures  above  stated.  As  a  rule,  a  dramatist 
who  does  the  strongest  work  of  which  he  is  capable,  risks 
absolute  failure,  and  has  at  best  to  be  content  with  a  quite 
moderate  success,  which,  moreover,  exhausts,  or  nearly  exhausts, 
the  money-making  capacity  of  his  play.  Few  plays  are  revived 
after  their  first  run,  and  fewer  still  prove  largely  remunerative  on 
revival.  In  working  for  the  National  Theatre,  then,  a  dramatist 
would  have  these  advantages  : — 

would  have  to  keep  ita  claim  upon  the  play  alive,  so  to  speak,  by  never  allowing  a 
stated  time  to  elapse  without  a  stated  number  of  performances.  The  usual  understand- 
ing might  be  that  if,  in  any  three  consecutive  seasons,  a  play  had  been  acted  less  than 
fifteen  times,  it  should  be  held  to  have  dropped  out  of  the  repertory,  and  the  entire 
control  of  it  should  revert  to  the  author.  The  Theatre  must  on  no  account  speculate  in 
plays — that  is  to  say,  acquire  any  rights  in  performances  of  them  other  than  those  which 
it  gives  itself. 


92  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

(i)  He  would  not  be  forced  to  suit  his  work  to  the  require- 
ments or  the  prejudices  of  a  particular  actor-  or  actress-manager. 
He  would  be  enabled,  for  instance,  to  produce  plays  containing 
several  parts  of  almost  equal  importance — a  liberty  denied  to 
him  under  the  star  system.  Such  a  play  as  Le  Monde  ou  Von 
s'ennuie  is  for  this  reason  impossible  on  the  English  stage.  Were 
The  School  for  Scandal  a  new  play,  the  practical  equality  of  the 
four  parts — Sir  Peter  and  Lady  Teazle,  Joseph  and  Charles 
Surface  —  would,  under  present  conditions,  almost  certainly 
exclude  it  from  the  stage. 

(2)  He  would  minimise  the  risk  of  absolute  failure.  The 
Theatre,  once  fairly  established,  would  certainly  attach  to  itself 
a  large  body  of  subscribers  and  habitual  frequenters,  taking  an 
interest  in  its  policy  and  its  fortunes,  who  would  seldom  leave 
a  new  play  unvisited.  A  dramatist  of  any  note,  then,  might 
securely  reckon  on  a  certain  number  of  good  houses,  and  would 
not  have  to  face  the  loss  of  prestige  involved  in  the  premature 
withdrawal  of  a  play  which  had  been  launched  for  a  hundred- 
night  or  two-hundred  night  run. 

(3)  Even  if  a  play  were  only  a  moderate  success  at  first, 
its  chances  of  a  long  life — of  maintaining  its  place  on  the 
stage  for  an  indefinite  number  of  years — would  be  much 
greater  at  the  National  Theatre  than  at  any  other.  It  is  a 
far  healthier  state  of  things,  and  far  better  for  a  dramatist's 
reputation,  if  not  for  his  pocket,  that  a  play  should  bring  in 
an  average  of  ;^500  a  year  for  ten  years  than  that  it  should 
bring  in  ;;^5000  in  one  year,  and  then  be  heard  of  no 
more. 

Another  point  is  to  be  noted,  which  has  an  important 
bearing  on  the  author's  position.  The  establishment  of  a 
Repertory   Theatre   of    this    class    in    London   would    almost 


PROVINCIAL   PROFITS  93 

certainly  be  followed  before  long  by  the  establishment  of 
similar  theatres — for  the  most  part,  no  doubt,  on  a  somewhat 
smaller  scale — in  all  the  important  cities  of  the  kingdom.  A 
play  which  had  met  with  any  acceptance  at  the  National 
Theatre  would  instantly  be  in  demand  at  a  score  of  Municipal 
or  Subscription  Theatres  in  the  provincial  centres ;  and  it 
might  often  happen,  as  it  does  in  Germany  at  present,  that 
the  provinces  would  redress  any  injustice  that  might  have 
been  done  in  the  capital.  At  present  a  play  which  has  not, 
at  any  rate,  the  appearance  of  having  made  a  great  success 
in  London,  is  practically  worthless  in  the  provinces ;  but  a 
number  of  Repertory  Theatres,  each  with  its  intelligently- 
interested  public  of  constant  subscribers,  would  enormously 
widen  the  range  of  appeal  open  to  a  dramatic  author,  to  say 
nothing  of  enhancing  his  revenues.  The  leading  dramatists 
of  Germany,  writing  exclusively  for  repertory  theatres,  have 
certainly  no  reason,  even  from  a  pecuniary  point  of  view,  to 
envy  our  playwrights  or  to  sigh  for  the  long-run  system. 

If  it  be  objected  that  a  playwright,  accustomed  to  modem 
conditions  of  mounting  and  stage-management,  will  not  will- 
ingly leave  his  work  to  the  tender  mercies  of  a  dozen  provincial 
companies,  whose  treatment  of  it  he  cannot  oversee  or  control, 
the  answer  is  again  a  reference  to  Germany,  where  playwrights 
find  this  system  answer  exceedingly  well.  It  of  course  pre- 
supposes,:^a  much  larger  number  of  competent  actors  and  able 
producers  than  we  at  present  possess  in  England  ;  but  these 
the  repertory  system  would  necessarily  beget,  if  it  ever  struck 
root  at  all ;  and  it  is  the  only  system  by  which  they  can 
ever  be  begotten.  Nor  would  the  author  necessarily  abandon 
all  control  over  the  representation  of  his  work  when  it  went 
forth   to   the    provincial    theatres.       Prompt    copies    would    be 


94  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

sent  to  the  theatres  where  the  play  was  to  be  given ;  the 
producers  attached  to  these  theatres  might  assist  at  the 
rehearsals  conducted  by  the  author  in  London ;  it  would  not 
infrequently  happen,  we  believe,  that  authors  would  find  time 
personally  to  supervise  some  of  the  rehearsals  at  the  leading 
provincial  theatres,  especially  if  they  knew  that  this  part  or 
that  had  been  allotted  to  an  actor  or  actress  of  promise. 
Cases  would  certainly  not  be  uncommon  in  which  a  provincial 
performer  would  make  a  striking  success  in  a  part  which 
had  perhaps  not  received  full  justice  in  London.  It  is  not 
pretended  that  the  provincial  performances  would  have  the 
absolute  mechanical  smoothness  attained  by  a  touring  com- 
pany under  present  conditions — a  company  which  elaborately 
mimics  the  London  production,  and  repeats  a  single  play 
night  after  night  for  months.  But  the  loss  of  this  soulless 
surface  polish  would  assuredly  be  no  loss  to  art ;  and  it  would 
be  a  distinct  gain  to  art  that  authors  should  learn  to  write 
plays  which  did  not  depend  for  their  ejQPect  upon  a  minute 
personal  supervision  of  the  actor's  every  tone  and  gesture.^ 

Each  addition  to  the  list  of  Repertory  Theatres  thi-oughout 
the  country  would  tend  in  many  ways  to  facilitate  the  work- 
ing of  all  the  rest.  But  even  supposing  the  National  Theatre 
to  stand  alone,  we  do  not  think,  for  the  reasons  stated  above, 
that  it  would  find  any  difficulty  in  securing  the  best  work 
of  the  best  dramatists.  On  the  contrary,  we  believe  that 
the  best  dramatists  are  fully  aware  that  present  conditions 
are  hostile  to  their  best  work,  and  would  lend  ready  support 

1  It  should  be  open  to  the  Director,  with  the  sanction  of  the  Trustees,  to  take  the 
whole  companv  on  tour,  on  certain  rare  occasions, — at  times,  for  instance,  when  the 
Theatre  had  to  be  closed  for  extensive  repairs.  Perhaps,  too,  a  system  of  reciprocity 
might  be  established  with  Repertory  Theatres  in  the  leading  provincial  towns,  whereby 
an  exchange  of  companies  for  a  brief  season  might  now  and  then  be  effected. 


A   NEW   OUTLET  95 

to  a  theatre  at  which  other  conditions  prevailed.  They  could 
not  but  gain  by  it,  since  it  would  oflFer  a  new  outlet  for 
their  work  without  in  any  way  restricting  or  inteifering  with 
the  outlets  at  present  at  their  command.  When  they  happened 
to  write  a  play  with  a  star  part,  a  "  strong  sentimental 
interest,"  or  any  other  attribute  that  seemed  to  promise  a 
two-hundred  or  three-hundred  night  run,  they  would  natur- 
ally carry  it  to  a  long-run  theatre.  But  such  themes  are  not 
the  only  themes — are  not  even  sufficiently  common  to  afford 
our  leading  playwrights  a  continuous  series  of  successes.  We 
find  them  frequently  essaying  themes  which  are  on  the  face 
of  it  unlikely  to  attract  the  three-hundred  night  public ;  and 
we  may  be  sure  that  for  one  such  theme  which  they  actually 
essay,  they  consider  and  reject  half-a-dozen,  knowing  them 
to  be  hopeless  under  actor-manager  and  long-run  conditions. 
They  would  welcome  a  theatre,  then,  which  should  enable 
them  to  produce  with  comparative  security  the  best  plays 
that,  under  existing  circumstances,  they  actually  write,  and 
would  encourage  them  to  write  the  still  better  plays  which, 
under  existing  circumstances,  they  leave  unwritten. 


SECTION    X 

The  Training  School — Principles  and  Regulations — A  possible 
Dramatic  College. 

A  Deamatic  Training  School  would  be  an  indispensable  adjunct 
to  a  National  Theatre.  In  saying  this,  we  do  not  commit  our- 
selves to  the  affirmative  side  in  the  ancient  controversy  as  to 
whether  acting  can  be,  and  ought  to  be,  taught.  On  the  con- 
trar}%  we  strongly  incline  to  the  negative  side.  The  better  part 
of  the  art  of  acting  cannot  be  directly  taught ;  but  certain  of  its 
constituent  elements  can  and  ought  to  be.  There  must  be  no 
excuse  for  the  appearance  at  this  Theatre,  in  however  unimpor- 
tant a  position,  of  any  person  who  is  entirely  unskilled  in  the 
rudimentary  mechanism  of  his  calling.  Though  many  teachers 
of  acting,  and  a  few  teaching  organisations  exist,  almost  the  only 
practical  training  obtainable  under  the  present  system  consists 
in  the  paternal  attentions  of  a  (more  or  less  qualified)  producer 
during  several  weeks  of  leisurely  rehearsing.  Were  this  method 
the  best  in  the  world,  it  is  clearly  impossible  in  a  Repertory 
Theatre.  A  high  standard  of  competence  must  be  maintained 
among  even  the  most  subordinate  members  of  a  company  called 
upon  to  do  such  varied  and  exacting  work  as  our  scheme  in- 
volves. To  this  end,  the  most  obvious,  economical,  and  efficient 
means  is  the  establishment  of  a  Dramatic  Training  School,  by 
which,  of  course,  it  would  not  be  the  National  Theatre  alone 
that  would  benefit.     Such  a  School,  well  conducted,  would  be 

of  incalculable  advantage  to  the  whole  art  of  English  acting. 

96 


THE   TRAINING   SCHOOL  97 

The  great  majority  of  our  leading  authors,  managers,  and  actors 
are  agreed  in  deploring  our  present  lack  of  any  such  insti- 
tution.^ 

We  have  not  gone  into  any  financial  estimate  for  the  Train- 
ing School,  as  it  could  clearly  be  made  self-supporting.  There 
is  a  great  demand  for  dramatic  training,  and  the  advantages  of 
a  School  afRhated  to  the  National  Theatue  would  certainly  attract 
large  numbers  of  paying  pupils.  At  the  same  time  there  would 
be  ample  room  for  endowment,  to  be  directed  to  three  ends  : — 

1.  The  establishment  of  Scholarships  for  students  of  notable 

promise  and  of  limited  means. 

2.  The  enlargement  of  the  teaching  staff,  so  as  to  enable  the 

School  (in  a  manner  to  be  hereafter  indicated)  to  fulfil 
all  the  functions  of  a  Dramatic  College. 

3.  The  provision  of  a  specially  suitable  building,  fitted  with 

all    desirable    appliances,    in    a    specially    convenient 
locality. 

The  School  should  be  artistically  and  financially  under  the 
control  of  the  Director  and  Business  Manager  of  the  Theatre. 
The  Director  would  have  to  delegate  to  a  specially-selected 
lieutenant  the  immediate  and  daily  supervision  of  its  working ; 
but  he  himself  would  remain  its  responsible  head. 

In  the  conduct  of  the  School,  two  main  principles  should  be 
observed : — 

(i)  Each  pupil  should  be  bound  to  apprentice  himself,  as  it 
were,  to  a  certain  minimum  course  of  study,  for  which  he  should 
pay  in  advance  a  large  proportion,  at  any  rate,  of  the  fees,  to  be 
forfeited  in  the  event  of  his  not  completing  the  course.     Some 

'  Written  before  the  establishment  of  Mr.  Beerbohm  Tree's  School  of  Acting. 

G 


98  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

such  precaution  would  be  necessary  to  insure  that  the  advan- 
tages of  the  School  should  not  be  abused  by  the  mere  trifler  and 
dilettante,  who  thinks  it  would  be  pleasant  to  dabble  in  a  calling 
which  he  imagines  to  be  an  easy  and  idle  one. 

(2)  The  second  principle  follows  from  what  we  have  said 
above  as  to  the  limits  within  which  the  teaching  of  acting  is 
desirable.  It  is  that  training  should,  as  far  as  possible,  be 
analytic  rather  than  synthetic — that  the  constituent  parts  of  act- 
ing, rather  than  acting  itself,  should  be  the  subjects  of  instruc- 
tion. The  teaching  of  acting,  either  in  a  studio  or  at  rehearsal, 
is  too  apt  to  mean  simply  the  coaching  of  a  young  actor  by  an 
old  actor  in  antiquated  methods.  With  a  little  experience,  an 
actor  will  learn  to  pick  and  choose  among  the  virtues  and  vices 
of  an  over-developed  style.  But  a  tyro  is  apt  to  absorb  only  the 
vices,  since  they  are  so  easy  to  imitate.  What  should  first  of  all 
be  taught  in  the  School  are  the  several  accomplishments  which, 
mastered  perfectly  and  used  instinctively,  go  to  make  an  actor 
complete  in  the  technique  of  his  art — voice-production,  elocu- 
tion, the  speaking  of  verse,  gesture,  dancing,  and  fencing.  The 
rehearsing  of  parts  should  be  confined  to  the  second  half  of  the 
training.     Individual  coaching  should  be  entirely  excluded. 

As  to  the  division  of  subjects  and  organisation  of  the  profes- 
sorial staff,  hints  may  be  gathered  from  several  existing  institu- 
tions, such  as  the  Eoyal  College  of  Music,  the  Guildhall  School 
of  Music,  and  Mr.  Franklin  Sargent's  American  Academy  of 
Dramatic  Arts.  The  School  should  certainly  share  with  the 
Theatre  the  services  of — say — three  of  its  actors  and  two  of  its 
actresses,  who,  with  but  a  portion  of  their  time  employed  at  the 
Theatre,  should  divide  the  work  of  rehearsing  advanced  pupils 
in  various  plays.  It  would  be  well,  indeed,  to  obtain  the  partial 
services  of  an  even  larger  number  of  actors  and  actresses  from 


THE   TRAINING   SCHOOL  99 

the  Theatre ;  for  pupils  should  be  placed  under  as  many  varie- 
ties of  stage  management  as  possible,  as  a  further  safeguard 
against  the  perils  of  imitation.^ 

It  will  be  noticed  that  we  suggest  the  employment  of  actresses 
as  well  as  actors  in  the  quality  of  School  stage-managers.  'I'here 
is  no  reason,  save  lack  of  opportunity,  why  an  experienced  actress 
should  not  be  an  excellent  stage-manager  ;  and  in  any  case,  in 
school  work,  there  are  many  things  which  women  must  be  taught 
by  women. 

Pupils  should  enter  the  School  for  not  less  than  one  and  not 
more  than  three  years.  An  entrance  examination  would  be 
advisable,  but  it  should  be  imposed  merely  with  the  object  of 
eliminating  the  quite  obviously  unfit.  Few  things  are  more 
difficult  or  more  dangerous  than  to  say  with  certainty  that  a 
young  person  "  will  never  act." 

The  first  year's  course  should  consist  solely  of  the  contribu- 
tory accomplishments  before-mentioned.  During  the  second 
year  the  study  and  rehearsing  of  parts  should  be  added.  Second 
year  pupils  would  be  used  to  "  walk  on  "  in  the  Theatre. 

In  their  third  year,  pupils  would  be  given  more  important 
parts  to  study  and  rehearse.  The  Director  of  the  Theatre  would 
attend  complete  rehearsals  and  (very  occasional)  pupil  -  per- 
formances. It  would  be  competent  for  him  to  cast  any  third- 
year  pupils  for  small  parts  in  the  Theatre  repertory,  and  to 
appoint  them  as  understudies.  For  this  they  would  be 
paid. 

Pupils  on  leaving  —  or,  as  the  Americans  say,  graduating 
from — the  School,  would  have  no  absolute  claim  to  engagements 

'  The  partial  employment  of  actors  and  actresses  in  the  Training  School  would  mean 
either  a  slight  reduction  of  the  salary-list  of  the  Theatre,  or  a  certain  enlargement  of 
the  company  without  increase  of  expenditure. 


lOO  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

at  the  Theatre.^  The  Director  would,  doubtless,  be  glad  to 
recruit  his  company  from  among  them,  knowing  the  soundness 
of  their  training.  But  it  would  of  course  be  impossible  to  keep 
on  increasing  the  staff  of  the  Theatre  year  by  year ;  and  more- 
over it  would  generally  be  advisable  for  trained  pupils  to  seek 
elsewhere  for  more  immediate  practice  in  important  parts  than 
they  could  possibly  hope  to  obtain  at  the  Central  Theatre. 
As  we  have  elsewhere  pointed  out,  the  successful  establishment 
of  a  National  Theatre  would  almost  certainly  be  followed  by  the 
establishment  of  Municipal  or  Subscription  Theatres  in  the 
great  provincial  centres,  and  the  directors  of  these  theatres 
would  be  sure  to  keep  a  watchful  eye  upon  the  pupils  of  the 
National  Theatre  Training  School. 

It  would  be  the  business  of  the  School — and  this  should 
be  clearly  understood  and  borne  in  mind — to  minister  to  the 
requirements  of  the  theatre  in  general,  no  less  than  to  those  of 
the  National  Theatre  in  particular.  While  the  National  Theatre 
kept — as  it  should  always  try  to  keep  —  in  the  forefront  of 
theatrical  progress,  its  pupils  would  be  welcomed  everywhere. 
But  to  have  graduated  in  an  old-fashioned  school  is  almost  worse 
than  to  have  graduated  in  no  school  at  all.  The  danger  common 
to  all  securely  established  bodies  is  that  of  falling  behind  the 
times.  The  School  should  be  so  ordered  as  to  help  the  Theatre 
to  avoid  this  danger,  by  providing  for  it  recruits  strong  in  the 
vital  principles  of  their  art,  instead  of  assisting  it  mechanically 
to  hand  on  an  academic  tradition  (however  worthy)  from  one 
artistic  generation  to  another. 

'  But  the  Theatre  would  have  a  first  claim  on  the  services  of  pupils  who  had  taken 
scholarships.  That  is  to  say,  it  would  be  at  the  option  of  the  Director  to  engage  them 
for  a  period  equivalent  to  the  period  of  their  scholarship,  and  if  offered  such  an  engage- 
ment they  would  be  bound  to  accept  it  on  terms  to  be  stated  in  the  Scholarsliip 
Regulations. 


THE   TRAINING   SCHOOL  loi 

As  the  School  would  not  be  run  with  a  view  to  profit,  the 
fees  woxild  be  regulated  so  as  simply  to  cover  the  necessary 
expenses,  apart  from  such  luxuries,  so  to  speak,  as  might  be 
provided  by  endowment.  At  the  same  time  it  is  clear  that, 
however  low  the  fees,  a  three-years'  course  of  training,  involving 
daily  attendance  in  the  centre  of  London,  is  a  means  of  entering 
the  theatrical  profession  costly  in  comparison  with  those  now 
usually  adopted.  But  this  is  not  to  be  regretted.  The  fact  that 
acting  is  a  trade  for  which  there  is  no  recognised  preparation, 
encourages  many  men,  and  still  more  women,  with  no  special 
aptitude,  to  "  go  on  the  stage  "  for  a  year  or  two,  and  then  to 
drop  it  as  soon  as  the  novelty  of  the  experience  has  worn  oflF. 
Thus  a  "  casual  labour"  class  is  created,  the  existence  of  which 
is  most  prejudicial  to  the  interests  of  the  lower  ranks  of  profes- 
sional actors,  whose  sole  chance  of  a  decent  livelihood  lies  in 
continuity  of  employment.  The  establishment  of  a  recognised 
Training  School  will  not,  of  course,  keep  this  "  casual  labour  " 
altogether  out  of  the  field,  but  it  will  create  a  clear  distinction 
between  the  actor  and  the  amateur,  so  that  in  time  a  certain 
stigma  will  attach  to  the  employment  of  wholly  unqualified 
people. 

Pupils  of  the  Training  School  would  be  admitted  to  some 
rehearsals  at  the  Theatre  (especially  to  those  of  classical  plays), 
and,  under  certain  restrictions,  to  performances  as  well. 

Though  technical  training  would  be  the  primary  business  of 
the  School,  it  ought  (as  above  foreshadowed)  to  develop  in 
process  of  time  into  a  Dramatic  College,  capable  of  giving 
instruction  in  all  subjects,  literary  or  artistic,  that  have  any 
direct  bearing  upon  the  actor's  art.  To  this  end  lectureships  in 
Dramatic  Literature,  History,  Archaeology,  &c.,  would  have  to  be 
endowed,  and  prizes  ofi'ered  for  proficiency  in  such  subjects.     But 


I02  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

attendance  at  these  lectures  (as  distinct  from  the  courses  of 
technical  training)  should  be  optional  and  free. 

It  may  be  objected  that  the  School  would  thus  trench  upon 
the  province  of  existing  educational  institutions — the  colleges 
of  the  University  of  London,  &c.,  &c. — where  a  wider  course 
of  literary  instruction  can  be  obtained  than  the  School  could 
possibly  oflFer.  The  answer  is  twofold.  In  the  first  place,  it 
would  be  impracticable  to  insist  that  pupils  should  have  gone 
through  a  complete  course  of  literary  instruction  hefore  entering 
the  Training  School,  and  equally  impracticable  to  expect  them 
to  attend  lectures  or  classes  in  other  parts  of  London  while  they 
are  going  through  their  course  of  technical  training.  Any 
literary  instruction  of  which  they  can  reasonably  be  expected  to 
avail  themselves  must  be  supplied  in,  or  quite  close  to,  the 
building  in  which  their  technical  training  is  carried  on.  In  the 
second  place,  though  the  actor's  literary  culture  should  no  doubt 
be  as  wide  as  possible,  yet  human  life  is  short,  and  the  literary 
coiurses  in  our  higher  colleges  include  much  matter  that  does 
not  bear  directly  upon  his  art,  and  omit  much  matter  that  does. 
It  is  visionarj'  to  expect  that  every  actor  should  qualify  for  a 
B.A.  degree ;  but  it  is  neither  superfluous  nor  impracticable  to 
offer  him,  along  with  his  technical  training,  courses  of  literary 
and  historical  instruction  specially  adapted  to  his  requirements 
— courses  which  should  awaken  in  him  an  intelligent  interest 
in  his  art,  and  deepen  his  comprehension  of  its  principles  and 
problems. 

The  County  Council  might  be  expected,  in  pursuance  of 
its  recent  policy,  to  allow  a  "grant  in  aid"  to  the  Training 
School. 


SECTION    XI 

General  Summary  of  Expenses — Receipts  required  to  Meet  Expenses- 
Possibilities  and  Probabilities — Order  of  Procedure. 


Summary  of  Expenses  for  One  Season. 


Salaries  : 

General  Staff.         ,         .         . 

Performers 

Employees  in  front  of  the  house 

Musical  Staff .... 

Employees  behind  the  scenes  . 
General  expenses  .... 


Total 


;^4,6oo  o 

28,777  10 

3>377  10 

3,900  o 

10,277  10 

14,050  o 

^£■64,982  10 


It  will  be  seen  that  our  estimate  of  expenses,  exclusive  of 
authors'  fees  and  the  percentage  on  the  receipts  of  non- 
copyright  PLAYS  WHICH  IS  TO  SUPPORT  THE  PENSION  FUND, 
amounts  to  ;;^64,982,  los.  From  this  we  deduct  ;^iooo,  the 
estimated  profit  on  the  sale  of  refreshments  (see  p.  62),  and 
arrive  at  ;^63,982,  los.,  or  in  round  numbers,  ;^64,ooo,  as  the 
nett  yearly  outlay.  This  means  that,  reckoning  the  number  of 
performances  at  363,  an  average  receipt  per  performance  of  ^177, 
p?MS  the  authors'  percentages,  would  be  needed  in  order  to  cover 
expenses.  Eeckoning  the  royalties,  whether  on  copyright  or 
non-copyright  plays,  at  an  average  of  10  per  cent.,  we  conclude 
that  an  average  receipt  of  about  £196,  13s.  would  be  required 
to  relieve  the  Theatre  from  the  need  of  a  yearly  subvention. 
What  likelihood  is  there  of  that  average  being  reached? 


»03 


I04  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

For  an  ordinary  London  theatre,  it  would  be  a  high 
average ;  but  the  criterion  is  not  a  just  one.  When  the 
initial  expenses  of  mounting  a  play  have  been  paid  oflF  by  a 
month  or  so  of  nearly  full  houses,  a  manager  can  aflford  to 
go  on  running  it  so  long  as  the  receipts  keep  a  few  pounds 
above  the  sum  which  it  costs  him  to  "  take  his  curtain  up " ; 
so  that  he  may  very  likely  play  it  for  months  to  audiences 
far  below  the  full  capacity  of  his  theatre.  If  his  nightly 
expenses,  including  rent,  taxes,  and  interest  on  borrowed 
money,  are  ^loo,  and  his  nightly  receipts  ;^iio,  he  is 
making  (with  matinees)  the  handsome  income  of  ;^8o  a  week, 
and  will  be  in  no  hurry  to  change  his  bill.  Thus  the"  average 
receipt  on  (say)  a  six-months'  run  may  be  no  more  than 
;^iio  or  ;^ii5  a  performance.  But  a  repertory  theatre,  per- 
petually renewing  its  attractions,  recruiting  a ,  solid  stand-by 
of  constant  supporters,  and  offering  the  public  more  com- 
fortable accommodation  at  lower  prices  than  the  long-run 
theatres  can  afford,  would  have  every  chance  of  securing 
more  constantly  well-filled  houses  than  most  of  the  long-run 
theatres  are  in  the  habit  of  attracting.  We  speak  of  theatres 
devoted  to  comedy  or  drama.  The  successful  extravaganza- 
theatres  probably  attract  a  very  high  average  of  receipts ;  but 
it  is  by  dint  of  very  lavish  expenditm^e. 

The  total  receipts  of  the  Th^atre-Frangais  in  the  year  1895 
were  ;^85,052  (2,126,275  francs).  The  prices  were  at  this  time 
pretty  nearly  equivalent  to  those  suggested  in  Section  VIII. 
They  ranged  from  10  francs  (8s.  4d.)  to  i  franc  (lod.) ;  but  the 
majority  of  the  best  places  in  the  house  (stalls  and  first  circle) 
were  sold  at  8  francs  and  7  francs  (6s.  8d.  and  5s.  lod.).  We 
believe  that  in  a  normal  season  at  the  Frangais  the  number  of 
performances  is  about  430 ;  so  that  the  average  receipt  of  this 


FORECAST   OF   RECEIPTS  105 

season  would  be  ;^i98,  or  /^^  more  than  the  average  receipt 
required  to  cover  expenses  at  the  Theatre  here  outlined.  Since 
1895  the  prices  at  the  Francais  have  risen.  They  are  now  nearly 
as  high  as  those  which  obtain  at  our  own  West  End  theatres. 
In  the  year  1902,  at  these  higher  prices,  the  total  receipts  were 
;^ioi,6o4  (2,540,103  francs),  or  an  average  of  over  .;^230  a 
performance.  The  Com^die  Francaise,  no  doubt,  enjoys  a 
prestige  which  cannot  possibly  attach  to  any  new  institution. 
On  the  other  hand,  something  must  be  allowed  for  the  charm 
of  novelty.  By  the  time  that  has  worn  oflf,  one  may  fairly 
hope  that  a  certain  amount  of  prestige  will  have  accrued  to 
the  Theatre. 

The  Th^atre-Fran^ais,  as  a  rule,  is  open  all  the  year 
round,  gives  afternoon  as  well  as  evening  performances  on 
Sundays,  and  not  infrequently  afternoon  performances  on 
Thursdays  as  well.  It  is  impossible  for  an  English  theatre 
to  give  so  many  performances  in  the  year ;  but  by  suppress- 
ing, in  whole  or  in  part,  the  six  weeks'  vacation  we  have 
reckoned  for — and  this  could  be  done  with  veiy  little  extra 
expense — we  could  considerably  diminish  the  average  re- 
ceipt required  in  order  to  cover  the  annual  outlay.  Vie 
are  inclined  to  believe  that  it  would  be  good  policy  to  close 
the  Theatre  for  a  fortnight  only,  reopening  about  the  middle 
of  August  instead  of  the  middle  of  September;  by  which 
means  the  average  receipt  required  (royalties  included)  could 
be  reduced  to  about  ;^I78.  But  as  this  short  vacation  would 
be  more  or  less  experimental,  we  thought  it  wiser  not  to  base 
our  calculations  upon  it. 

An  analysis  of  the  individual  receipts  required  to  make 
up  the  necessary  average  will  show,  we  trust,  that  our  expecta- 


tions are  not  extravagant. 


io6  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

We  estimate,  as  before  explained  (p.  8i),  for  a  theatre 
seating  1550  people,  but  we  strike  off  fifty  seats  for  free 
admissions.     There  would  be  three  scales  of  prices : 

At  full  prices  (on  nights  for  which  subscription  tickets 
are  not  available)  the  house  would  hold  ^345. 

At  "ordinary"  prices  (on  nights  when  subscription  tickets 
are  available,  but  one  row  in  every  three  is  supposed  to  be 
occupied  by  non-subscribers  paying  full  rates)  the  house  would 

hold  ;^30I,    I2S. 

At  reduced  prices,  for  educational  and  other  special  per- 
formances, the  house  would  hold  ^160. 

The  Director  has  the  right  to  suspend  the  subscription 
and  charge  full  prices  throughout  the  house  on  a  maximum 
of  60  performances  in  the  season.  Supposing  him  to  exercise 
this  right  on  only  50  nights,  and  supposing  the  average  receipt 
of  these  nights  to  be  ;^340,  we  find  that  they  would  bring 
£1^,000  into  the  treasury. 

Again,  during  the  greater  part  of  the  season  there  would 
be  a  full-dress  and  full-price  subscription  night  once  a  week, 
like  the  fashionable  Mardis  of  the  Theatre-Francais.  Suppos- 
ing that  there  were  30  such  nights,  at  a  receipt  of  ;^320, 
this  would  give  a  total  of  ;!^96oo. 

Again,  in  the  season  we  have  outlined,  we  reckon  on  two 
new  plays  and  one  Shakespearean  revival  making  a  marked 
success.  In  such  cases  we  might  reasonably  expect  to  fill 
the  house  at  "  ordinary  "  prices  for  a  fairly  long  series  of  nights. 
Suppose,  then,  that  each  of  these  three  productions  draws  ;^300 
for  25  nights — this  gives  us  a  total  of  ;^22,500. 

We  may  fairly  reckon,  too,  on  reaching  the  maximum  at 
"  ordinary "  prices  on,  say,  ten  other  nights,  bringing  in  a 
total  of  ^3000. 


FORECAST   OF    RECEIPTS  107 

Thus  we  have  165  performances  bringing  ;^52,ioo  into 
the  treasury. 

Now  a  royalty  of  10  per  cent,  on  ;^52,ioo  comes  to  /'5210. 
This,  then,  we  must  add  to  our  total  expenses  of  ;i^63,982, 
making  ^69,192  in  all. 

The  Director  reserves  (as  against  the  Subscribers)  the  right 
to  give  a  maximum  of  fifteen  performances  in  the  season  at 
reduced  prices.  We  suppose  him  to  exercise  this  right  on  ten 
occasions,  bringing  in  £1600.  On  this  sum  no  royalties  would 
have  to  be  paid.  The  plays  given  would  be  Shakespearean  and 
other  classical  pieces,  "  for  the  use  of  schools,"  and  of  students 
preparing  for  examinations. 

We  now  add  the  ^1600  resulting  from  these  ten  perform- 
ances to  our  former  total  of  receipts,  and  find  that  175  perform- 
ances have  brought  in  jC53>7oo.  This  we  deduct  from  our  last 
total  of  expenses,  and  find  that  ;^i 5,491  {2)lus  royalties)  have 
still  to  be  accounted  for  in  188  (that  is,  363  minus  175)  per- 
formances. Dividing  188  into  ;^  15,491,  we  get  as  nearly  as 
possible  ^82.  This,  then,  plus  the  percentage — say,  £g  a 
night— would  have  to  be  the  average  receipt  of  ordinary  per- 
formances. Now  ^82  j3?MS  jC9  makes  ^91  ;  and  that  is 
considerably  less  than  one-third  of  the  money  capacity  of  the 
Theatre  at  "  ordinary  "  rates  ;  indeed,  just  about  one-third  of  its 
capacity  at  subscription  rates  alone. 

Let  us  look  at  the  matter  in  another  light.  Taking  the  total 
annual  outlay,  exclusive  of  royalties,  at  ;^63,982,  and  adding 
one-ninth  of  this  sum  to  cover  the  royalties,  we  find  ;^7 1,091 
to  be  the  whole  annual  expense.  Suppose,  now,  that  the 
Theatre  were  a  great  success,  and  that  the  average  of  its 
receipts  was  equivalent  to  the  full  house  at  subscription  rates 
alone,  we  find  that  the  season's  receipts  would  be  j^  100 


io8  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

and  that  the  profit  on  the  season's  working  would  be 
^29,641,  los.,  minus  the  additional  royalties  arising  from  the 
surplus  receipts.  We  do  not,  of  course,  calculate  on  such 
success  as  this,  though  it  is  far  from  impossible  ;  but  we  state 
the  figures  in  order  to  show  that  there  is  a  large  margin  be- 
tween great  success  and  failure  to  make  both  ends  meet. 

We  may  here  present  a  summary  of  the  various  "  margins  " 
allowed  in  the  course  of  our  calculations — points  at  which  it 
is  highly  probable  that  receipts  may  be  increased  or  expenses 
diminished,  (i)  It  is  quite  possible  (as  pointed  out  in  the  foot- 
note to  p.  81)  that  the  Theatre  might  seat  1650  instead  of  1550 
people,  so  that  the  full  house  at  full  prices  would  bring  in  ;C375 
instead  of  ;^345.^  (2)  In  all  our  calculations  we  have  left  50 
seats  out  of  account  as  being  partly  box-seats  and  partly  free 
seats  ;  but  there  would  be  many  occasions  on  which  all,  or  almost 
all,  these  seats  would  be  occupied  by  paying  spectators.  (3)  As 
we  have  just  seen  (p.  105),  it  would  be  possible,  at  very  little 
extra  expense,  to  add  at  least  thirty-two  performances  to  thei:363 
we  have  estimated  for,  thus  considerably  reducing  the  nightly 
average  of  receipts  required  to  balance  expenses.  (4)  It  may 
quite  possibly  appear  that  the  10  per  cent,  on  the  receipts 
of  non-copyright  plays  which  we  allot  to  the  Pension  Fund 
is  more  than  is  required  to  establish  the  Fund  on  a  solid 
basis ;  in  which  case  the  percentage  would  naturally  be  reduced. 

'  Since  the  above  was  written,  Mr.  John  Hare  has  informed  us  that  at  the  Hollis 
Street  Theatre,  Boston,  Mass.,  he  has  acted  A  Pair  of  Spectacles  (a  play  demanding  the 
minutest  and  most  delicate  effect*)  without  feeling  any  inconvenience  from  the  size  o£ 
the  house,  which  nevertheless  contained  ^400  at  prices  ranging  from  two  dollars 
downwards — very  little  higher  than  the  prices  we  suggest.  This  confirms  our  impres- 
sion that  a  theatre  might  be  designed,  equally  adapted  to  Shakespeare  and  to  modern 
comedy,  which  should  hold  at  least  ^375.  In  that  case,  the  calculations  on  pp.  106, 
107  would  give  something  like  ^77  (instead  of  ;^9i)  as  the  average  receipt  required 
for  ordinary  performances. 


ORDER   OF   PROCEDURE  T09 

(5)  The  partial  employment  of  members  of  the  company  as 
teachers  in  the  Training  School  might  lead  to  a  certain  lighten- 
ing of  the  salary-list.  If  our  hope  of  larger  incomings  or  smaller 
outgoings  should  be  justified  in  even  one  or  two  of  these  cases, 
the  effect  on  the  yearly  balance-sheet  would  be  considerable. 

If  it  be  asked  what  we  conceive  to  be  the  natural  order  of 
procedure  in  calling  such  a  Theatre  into  being,  we  would  fore- 
cast it  as  follows  :  1  The  starting-point  would  unquestionably 
be  the  conditional  promise  of  the  building.  That  secured,  the 
next  step  would  be  to  obtain  the  equally  conditional  promise  of 
a  site.  In  other  words,  Donor  A.  would  say  to  Donors  B.,  C,  D. 
(individuals  or  a  Corporation),  "  If  you  will  grant  a  site  on  such- 
and-such  terms,  I  will  erect  a  theatre  on  it  which  shall  ulti- 
mately, on  such-and-such  conditions,  become  the  property  of  the 
Nation  ; "  whereupon  Donors  B.,  C,  D.  would  reply,  "  If  you 
can  satisfy  us  that  there  is  a  reasonable  chance  of  this  Theatre 
successfully  fulfilling  its  purposes,  we  are  willing  to  grant  the 
site."  Then  Donor  A.  and  Donors  B.,  C,  D.  would  consult 
together  (under  expert  advice)  on  the  terms  of  a  provisional 
constitution.  Chief  among  the  advising  experts  would  in  all 
probability  be  the  man  provisionally  designated  to  fill  the  post  of 
Director.  Before  matters  went  much  further,  the  various  public 
Bodies  above  enumerated  (p.  10)  ought  to  be  invited  to  nomi- 
nate Trustees,  and  to  undertake  this  duty  in  permanency,  as 
occasion  should  arise.  But  as  the  majority  of  the  Board  would, 
in  the  first  instance,  be  nominated  by  the  Donors  of  the  building 
and  site,  this  would  practically  mean  that  the  Donors  reserved 

'  Assuming,  for  the  moment,  the  co-operation  of  several  Donors,  though  we  believe 
it  equally  probable,  and  at  least  equally  desirable,  that  the  whole  institution  should  be 
created  by  one  man. 


no  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

to  themselves  the  right  to  appoint  the  first  Director.  It  would 
not  be  advisable  to  leave  this  appointment  entirely  in  the  hands 
of  the  newly  constituted  and  untried  Board  of  Trustees.  The 
Trustees  being  provisionally  appointed,  the  next  step  would  be 
for  the  Donors  to  discuss  with  them,  and  obtain  their  definite 
assent  to,  the  Statutes  by  which  their  functions  were  to  be  re- 
gulated. Not  until  the  Statutes  were  finally  and  unanimously 
ratified  would  the  Trustees  be  considered  as  definitely  holding 
office.  This  point  being  reached,  they  would  so  far  enter  on 
their  functions  as  to  set  about  the  raising  of  the  Guarantee 
Fund.  Their  proposals  would  set  forth  that  the  constitution  of 
the  Theatre  had  now  been  settled  in  such-and-such  terms,  and 
the  site  and  the  building  promised,  provided  that  a  body  of 
Guarantors  would  undertake,  on  their  part,  to  be  responsible 
for  such-and-such  a  sum,  to  be  paid  to  the  credit  of  the  Theatre 
six  months  before  the  date  of  its  opening  (to  be  subsequently 
fixed).  At  a  somewhat  earlier  stage,  the  Donor  of  the  building 
would  probably  have  invited  architects  to  send  in  competitive 
designs  for  a  theatre  to  occupy  the  proposed  site.  With  the 
criticism  and  selection  of  the  design  the  Trustees  should, 
officially  at  all  events,  have  nothing  to  do.  This  task  the 
Donor  should  reserve  to  himself,  in  concert  with  the  Director 
and  the  Donors  of  the  site,  who  would  probably  appoint  a  small 
commission  of  experts  to  represent  them.  Sketches  and  plans 
of  the  selected  design  should,  if  possible,  accompany  the  pro- 
posals for  the  formation  of  the  Guarantee  Fund.  As  soon  as  it 
was  evident  that  no  hitch  in  the  arrangements  was  to  be  feared, 
the  building  might  be  proceeded  with  ;  and  in  due  time  the 
General  Staff"  would  be  appointed,  and  the  Director  would  set 
about  organising  his  company  and  arranging  his  repertory  for 
the  first  season.     At  what  time  the  salaries  of  the  Director  and 


ORDER  OF   PROCEDURE  iii 

other  employees  should  begin  to  accrue  would,  of  course,  be  a 
matter  of  private  arrangement ;  but  all  salaries  paid  or  payable 
before  the  opening  of  the  Theatre  should  be  reckoned  as  part  of 
the  building  donation,  along  with  the  initial  stock  of  scenery 
and  costumes.  On  the  day  fixed  for  the  opening  performance, 
Donor  A.  and  Donors  B.,  C,  D.  should  definitely  make  over 
the  building  and  site  to  the  Trustees,  who  should  from  that 
moment  enter  upon  their  full  functions  ;  while  the  Donors  and 
Guarantors  should  thenceforth  have  no  more  control  over  the 
enterprise  than  any  other  members  of  the  general  public. 

It  is  needless  to  add  that  many  of  the  negotiations  which 
we  have  here  represented  as  successive  might,  and  probably 
would,  be  undertaken  simultaneously.  We  have  merely  tried  to 
sketch  their  logical  order,  supposing  "one  thing  at  a  time"  to 
be  the  motto  of  the  promoters  of  the  enterprise.  Nor  need  we 
say  that  if  the  whole  Institution — Site,  Building,  and  Guarantee 
Fund — were  to  be  provided  by  one  Donor,  the  method  of  pro- 
cedure would  be  immensely  simplified. 


SECTION    XII 

The  Guarantee  Fund — The  Amount  Required — Provisions  for  its  Administra- 
tion— How  to  Wind  up  in  Case  of  Failure — How  to  Apply  the  Surplus  in 
Case  of  Success — The  Sinking  Fund. 

We  have  now  outlined,  in  as  much  detail  as  seemed  desirable  at 
the  present  stage,  the  scheme  of  a  National  Theatre  which  we 
believe  to  be  attainable  without  any  extravagant  demand  upon 
the  public  spirit  of  a  great  and  wealthy  community.  As  above 
stated,  the  financial  pre-suppositions  of  the  scheme  are  two:  (i) 
that  the  Theatre  Building  should  be  provided,  free  of  rent, 
taxes,  insurance  premium,  and  cost  of  upkeep ;  (2)  that  a 
Guarantee  Fund  should  be  raised  to  assure,  for  a  certain  period 
at  any  rate,  the  solvency  of  the  institution. 

It  has  now  to  be  pointed  out  that  a  good  theatre,  in  a  good 
position,  has  always  a  high  commercial  value,  and  that  in  the 
event  of  the  failure  of  the  National  enterprise,  property  in  the 
building  and  site  should  revert  to  the  Donor  or  Donors,  together 
with  the  Guarantors,  who  would  thus  not  have  wasted  their 
substance  to  no  end,  but  would  recover  a  considerable  part  of 
it.  The  condition  of  aflfairs  which  is  to  be  taken  as  implying 
failure  and  involving  the  winding  up  of  the  enterprise,  must  be 
clearly  determined  beforehand ;  and  to  this  end  we  proceed  to 
make  some  suggestions.  The  Statutes  governing  this  side  of 
the  enterprise  must,  of  course,  be  drawn  up  in  consultation 
with  skilled  financiers.  All  we  attempt  for  the  present  is  to 
afford  some  rough  indication  of  what  their  provisions  might  be. 


GUARANTEE    FUND  113 

To  give  the  enterprise  at  the  outset  a  fair  chance  of  success, 
it  is  clear  that  the  Guarantee  Fund  must  be  liberal  and  must  be 
known  to  be  liberal.  As  the  salaries  allotted  to  actors  and  to 
many  other  employees  are  regulated  on  the  assumption  of  ex- 
ceptional stability,  the  whole  calculation  would  evidently  be 
upset  if,  in  the  eyes  of  the  persons  to  be  so  remunerated,  the 
enterprise  seemed,  not  stable,  but  precarious.  The  Guarantee 
Fund  must  be  guaranteed  sufficient  to  ensure  the  existence  of 
the  enterprise,  even  in  the  face  of  the  largest  yearly  deficits  that 
can  reasonably  be  anticipated,  for  a  certain  term  of  years  ;  and 
the  point  at  which  failure  is  to  be  considered  definite  and 
irretrievable  must  be  so  fixed  that  the  remaining  portion  of 
the  Guarantee  Fund  shall  be  sufficient  to  indemnify,  on  a  certain 
fixed  scale,  those  with  whom  the  Theatre  has  been  forced  to 
break  any  expressed  or  implied  contract 

Let  us  roughly  calculate  what  losses  might  conceivably  have 
to  be  met.  Absolute  accuracy  is  almost  impossible  in  these 
calculations,  for  every  diminution  in  the  receipts  involves  a 
corresponding  diminution  in  the  expenses,  seeing  that  the  sums 
paid  in  royalties,  to  authors  and  to  the  Pension  Fund,  would  be 
smaller.  We  can  but  roughly  work  out  these  complex  calcula- 
tions ;  but  in  all  cases  we  may  be  taken  as  stating  outside 
figures. 

We  assume,  then,  that  the  total  expenses  of  the  season  of 
363  performances  (royalties  included)  amount  to  ;^7 1,091.  We 
have  seen  that  the  full  capacity  of  the  house  at  "  ordinary"  rates 
(one-third  at  full  prices  and  two-thirds  at  subscription  prices) 
would  be  in  round  numbers  ;^300.  Supposing,  now,  that  the 
average  receipt  were  only  one-half  of  that  sum,  ^T 150,  the  total 
receipt  for  the  season  would  be  j^ 54,450,  leaving  a  deficit  of 
£16,641,  or,  roughly  allowing  for  the  diminished  royalties,  say 

H 


114  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

;^  1 5,000.  If  the  average  receipt  were  only  ;^ioo,  the  deficit 
would  be  about  ^^  30,000  ;  if  the  average  receipt  were  ;^  175,  the 
deficit  would  be  about  ^7000. 

In  view  of  these  figures,  we  suggest  that  the  Guarantee  Fund 
should  be  ;£  150,000.  On  this  supposition,  let  us  forecast  various 
eventualities.^ 

Take  the  worst  event  that  is  reasonably  conceivable.  Suppose 
that  the  average  receipt  was  only  £^0,  and  that  the  season's 
deficit  was  ^^42,000.  This  would  mean,  of  course,  that  the 
Theatre  had  wholly  failed  to  answer  its  purpose  and  to  supply 
any  want.  But  the  fault  might  lie  in  the  management.  The 
Trustees  at  the  end  of  the  season  might  dismiss  the  Director 
(paying  any  indemnity  that  might  have  been  stipulated  for  in 
such  an  event),  and  might  transfer  the  control  of  the  enterprise 
to  a  new  Director. 

Suppose  that  the  new  Director  produced  a  slightly  better 
result,  the  deficit  on  the  second  season  being  ;^2  7,000,  and  on  the 
third  season  ;£20,ooo.  Thus,  at  the  end  of  the  third  season,  the 
whole  Guarantee  Fund  would  have  been  reduced  by  three-fifths 
— ;£90,ooo  having  been  spent,  and  ;£6o,ooo  remaining  to  draw 
upon.  The  course  now  to  be  taken  by  the  Trustees  would  depend 
on  many  circumstances,     (a)  It  might  be  quite   clear  that,  in 

'  The  term  Guarantee  Fund,  as  noted  on  p.  7,  is  used  for  convenience,  but  is 
scarcely  accurate.  The  money  would  have  to  be,  not  merely  promised,  but  paid  in  full 
to  the  account  of  the  Theatre.  The  interest  on  it  would  go  to  paying  the  rates  and 
taxes  on  the  Theatre,  the  insurance  premium,  and  the  cost  of  repairs.  How  the 
Theatre  might  be  rated  it  is  impossible  to  foresee  at  all  definitely.  It  may  be  hoped 
that  the  Commissioners  would  not  be  too  exacting.  The  insurance  premium  would 
probably  not  be  much  less  than  ^1000  a  year.  The  repairs  to  the  building  ought  not 
for  some  years  to  form  a  considerable  item.  So  long  as  the  Guarantee  Fund  remained 
intact,  tlie  income  arising  from  it  ought  to  be  ample  for  all  thes>-  purposes.  But  should 
it  be  trenched  upon  to  any  large  exteut,  the  income  might  become  inadequate ;  and  in 
that  case  any  deficit  would  have  to  be  charged  to  the  yearly  expenses  of  the  Theatre. 
See  Statute  19,  p.  130. 


GUARANTEE    FUND  115 

spite  of  the  large  deficits,  the  Theatre  was  taking  root,  acquiring 
prestige,  giving  a  valuable  stimulus  to  theatrical  life  in  general. 
In  that  case  the  Trustees  would  doubtless  continue  the  Director 
in  ofRce,  and  ask  him  to  go  on  as  he  had  begun.  It  might  be 
that  he  would  gradually  reduce  the  deficit  to  ;£50oo,  ^^3000, 
^2000,  ;^500 ;  so  that  at  the  end  of  the  seventh  season  the 
actual  loss  would  have  been  ;^  100, 500.  The  eighth  season  might 
show  a  clean  balance-sheet,  and  from  the  ninth  onward  profits 
might  begin  to  be  made — a  possibility  to  be  discussed  further  on. 
For  the  moment,  let  us  return  to  the  point  at  which,  after 
three  seasons,  _;^90,ooo  had  been  lost,  and  consider  another  set 
of  possible  circumstances.  (b)  The  position  of  the  Theatre 
might  be  entirely  dubious,  and  the  possibility  of  a  further 
reduction  in  the  yearly  deficit  problematical.  The  Statutes 
would  probably  permit  the  Trustees,  in  the  event  of  absolute 
disaster,  to  wind  up  the  enterprise  after  three  seasons ;  and  a 
party  of  the  Trustees  might  wish  to  regard  the  existing  state  of 
affairs  as  absolutely  disastrous,  and  to  throw  up  the  sponge. 
Let  us  suppose  this  party  in  a  minority,  however,  and  suppose 
that  the  Theatre  were  carried  on  for  three  more  seasons 
at  an  annual  loss  of  ^10,000.  The  total  loss  would  then 
have  been  ;^  120,000,  or  four- fifths  of  the  Guarantee  Fund. 
Now  we  suggest  that  at  this  point — as  soon,  that  is  to  say, 
as  the  Guarantee  Fund  is  reduced  to  ;^30,ooo — the  Statutes 
should  make  it  obligatory  on  the  Trustees  either  to  raise  a 
further  Guarantee  Fund  of  at  least  ;if  30,000,  or  to  wind  up  the 
enterprise.  This  provision  would  be  all  the  more  desirable  as 
the  success  or  failure  of  the  Trustees  in  the  attempt  to  raise  the 
further  Guarantee  Fund  would  afi"ord  a  pretty  conclusive  answer 
to  the  question  whether  the  Theatre  was  or  was  not  justifying  its 
existence,  and  fulfilling  an  important  social  and  artistic  function. 


ii6  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

If  it  was  felt  to  be  so  valuable  that  it  should  at  least  have 
another  chance  of  establishing  itself  in  financial  security,  the 
;^30,ooo  necessary  for  its  continuance  would  very  soon  be 
forthcoming.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  it  was  felt  to  be  hopelessly 
struggling  along  and  cumbering  the  ground,  no  one  would  come 
to  its  rescue,  and  the  Trustees  would  have  no  option  but  to  wind 
it  up.  For  this  purpose  the  ^30,000  in  hand  would  be  far  more 
than  was  needed.  We  fix  this  very  wide  margin  in  order  that 
every  employee  of  the  Theatre,  from  the  Director  to  the  Call-boy, 
might  feel  absolutely  certain  that,  if  the  worst  came  to  the 
worst,  all  contracts  would  be  fulfilled.  For  the  indemnification 
of  actors  and  others  who  had  accepted  comparatively  small 
salaries  in  consideration  of  the  permanence  of  the  institution 
and  the  expectancy  of  a  pension,  the  accumulations  of  the 
Pension  Fund  would  be  available,  though  they  might  have  to  be 
supplemented  from  the  Guarantee  Fund. 

The  huge  initial  deficits  we  have  hitherto  assumed — ^43,000, 
;^2 7,000,  and  ^20,000 — are  in  fact  extremely  improbable.  Such 
eventualities  have  to  be  faced  and  provided  for  in  theory ;  but 
in  practice  we  believe  that  something  like  this  would  be  much 
more  apt  to  happen  :  The  first  season,  while  the  institution  had 
the  attraction  of  novelty,  might  show  a  deficit  of  ;i^5000,  which 
might  rise  in  the  following  five  seasons  to  an  average  deficit 
of  (say)  ;^8ooo,  so  that  at  the  end  of  the  sixth  season  the 
Guarantee  Fund  might  have  been  reduced  by  ;!^45,ooo.  The 
question  would  now  be  whether  the  deficit  tended,  season  by 
season,  to  rise  or  to  fall.  In  the  latter  case,  all  would  be  plain 
sailing :  the  Theatre  would  evidently  be  gradually  recruiting  and 
educating  its  public,  and  might  confidently  be  expected,  after  a 
few  more  seasons,  to  show  a  balance  to  the  good.  In  the  former 
case — if  the  deficit  tended  rather  upwards  than  downwards — the 


GUARANTEE    FUND  117 

Trustees  would  have  to  call  the  Director  and  the  General  Staff 
into  very  serious  consultation.  On  the  one  hand,  measures  of 
economy  would  have  to  be  discussed  ;  on  the  other  hand,  schemes 
for  enhancing  the  attractions  of  the  Theatre.  It  would,  of 
course,  be  open  to  the  Trustees  to  call  in  expert  advice  from 
without.  A  system  of  reforms  might  perhaps  be  suggested  by 
an  outside  critic  which  might  commend  itself  to  the  Trustees 
and  not  to  the  Director.  If  he  was  disinclined  even  to  attempt 
its  execution,  his  only  course  would  be  to  resign,  under  whatever 
conditions  his  contract  prescribed.  The  author  of  the  approved 
scheme  might  then  be  appointed  Director,  or  some  one  else  who 
was  in  sympathy  with  it.  The  new  Director  might  turn  the 
tide,  and  after  the  ninth  or  tenth  season,  the  yearly  accounts 
might  begin  to  show  a  surplus  in  place  of  a  deficit.  Or  it  is 
conceivable  that  all  refoiTas  might  be  in  vain,  and  that  the 
Guarantee  Fund  might  keep  on  dwindling  by  small  sums — 
jC  1000  this  year,  ^500  next  year,  ;,^300  the  year  after — both 
ends  never  quite  meeting.  In  such  a  case,  twenty,  thirty,  or 
forty  years  might  pass  before  the  total  loss  of  ^120,000  was 
reached,  after  which  the  Trustees  were  bound  by  the  Statutes 
either  to  raise  a  further  Guarantee  Fund  or  to  wind  up  the 
enterprise.  That  limit  being  reached,  their  duty  would  be  the 
same  whether  after  six  seasons  or  after  sixty.  But  we  suggest 
that  the  Statutes  might  contain  a  special  provision  to  meet  the 
case  of  a  constant  series  of  small  deficits.  If  the  experience  of 
(say)  twenty  seasons  proved  that  the  Theatre  could  not  be  run 
so  as  to  fulfil  its  purposes  except  at  an  annual  loss  of  (say) 
^5000,  but  that,  with  that  deficit,  it  did  amply  fulfil  its  purposes, 
the  Trustees  might  be  permitted,  in  concert  with  the  Guarantors, 
to  convert  the  Guarantee  Fund  into  a  fixed  endowment  capital, 
bringing  in   a  yearly  income    sufficient    for   the    needs  of  the 


ii8  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

institution.^  We  would  add,  however,  that  in  no  event  ought 
this  course  to  be  made  obligatory  on  the  Trustees,  and  that  the 
effort  to  make  the  Theatre  self-supporting  should  not  be  aban- 
doned until  its  impossibility  had  been  clearly  demonstrated. 

But  here  a  caveat  is  perhaps  desirable.  It  ought  to  be  under- 
stood from  the  outset  that  while  the  Director  must  always 
exercise  every  reasonable  economy,  he  must  not  adopt  a  cheese- 
paring, and  still  less  a  "  sweating,"  policy  in  order  to  make  both 
ends  meet.  The  first  Director  in  particular  might  be  tempted 
to  pursue  penny-wise  and  pound-foolish  tactics  in  the  hope  of 
astonishing  the  Trustees  by  a  seemingly  brilliant  balance-sheet. 
This  he  might  do  in  three  ways :  by  starving  the  scenery  and 
costume  departments,  by  over-working  the  company  and  "  sweat- 
ing "  the  subordinate  members,  or  by  prevailing  on  the  Eeading 
Committee  to  admit  unworthy  plays  into  the  repertory,  and 
exploiting  them  to  the  extreme  limit  permitted  by  the  Regula- 
tions. In  the  last  case,  the  Trustees  would  have  a  more  or 
less  effective  check  upon  his  proceedings.  In  their  comment 
upon  his  quarterly  or  half-yearly  report,  they  might  censure  the 
prominence  given  to  an  objectionable  play  or  class  of  play, 
and  he  would  be  bound,  at  his  peril,  to  give  heed  to  their 
censure.  But  it  would  be  very  difficult  for  the  Trustees  to  take 
cognisance  of  a  series  of  individually  minute  economies  in 
salaries  and  other  outgoings,  whose  cumulative  effect  might  none 
the  less  be  disastrous.  It  would  be  a  wise  measure,  then,  for  the 
Trustees  to  give  the  Director  to  understand  at  the  outset  that 
during  the  first  two  or  three  seasons  a  moderate  deficit  would 
not  be  reckoned  to  his  discredit.     The  object  of  these  seasons 

'  It  may  be  jwinted  out,  however,  that  this  would  clearly  be  a  fitting  opportunity 
for  the  Government  to  step  in,  make  some  equitable  arrangement  with  the  Guarantors, 
and  allot  the  Theatre  the  yearly  subvention  which  experience  had  shown  to  be 
nece-ssary. 


LIQUIDATION  119 

should  not  be  to  produce  a  surplus,  or  even,  at  all  costs,  to  make 
ends  meet,  but  to  establish  the  Theatre  in  the  favour  and  respect 
of  the  public,  to  set  on  foot  a  worthy  artistic  tradition,  and  to 
beget  in  artists  and  employees  a  sense  of  comfort,  security,  and 
loyalty  to  the  institution. 

We  have  now  to  consider  the  method  of  winding  up  the 
enterprise  in  the  event  of  conclusive  failure.  Our  suggestion  is 
that  the  Trustees  should  be  empowered  to  sell  the  Theatre 
Building  and  site  (supposing  the  site  to  be  freehold),  and 
apply  the  proceeds  to  reimbursing,  in  the  proportion  of  their 
contributions  to  the  enterprise,  the  Donor  or  Donors  of  the 
building  and  site  and  the  contributors  to  the  Guarantee  Fund. 
Let  us  suppose  that  the  site  was  given  by  one  Donor  and  cost 
;^75,ooo;  that  the  Building  was  provided  and  equipped  by 
another  Donor  at  the  cost  of  ;^  100,000  ;  and  that  the  Guarantee 
Fund  was  provided  by  a  hundred  contributors  of  ^1500  each. 
After  ten  seasons  (let  us  say)  the  Guarantee  Fund  has  been 
reduced  by  ^120,000,  leaving  ^^30,000  in  hand;  and  the 
Trustees  have  failed  to  raise  a  further  Guarantee  Fund.  They 
must  then  proceed  to  the  liquidation  of  the  enterprise.  Its 
liabilities  absorb  (over  and  above  the  Pension  Fund  accumula- 
tions), say  ;^i 5,000,  leaving  ^15,000  of  the  original  Guarantee 
Fund  still  in  hand.  They  then  proceed  to  sell  the  Theatre  and 
site.  These  might  quite  possibly  fetch  more  than  they  cost ;  but 
let  us  take  the  opposite  view  and  assume  that,  having  cost 
;^i75,ooo,  they  sell  for  only  ;^i 50,000.  Thus  the  Trustees 
would  have  ;!f  165,000  to  divide  between  one  Donor  of  ^'75,000, 
one  Donor  of  ;i{^  100,000,  and  a  hundred  Guarantors  of  ^1500. 
The  result  would  be  (if  our  arithmetic  is  correct)  that  the  Donor 
of  the  site  would  receive  a  little  more  than  ;^3 7,500,  the  Donor 
of  the  building  a  little  less  than  ;i^52,500,   and  each   of  the 


I20  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

Guarantors  a  little  more  than  ^^750.  In  other  words,  the 
Donors  and  the  Guarantors  would,  in  the  event  of  the  failure  of 
the  enterprise,  all  stand  to  lose  a  little  less  than  half  of  their 
respective  contributions. 

Taking  a  more  cheerful  and  at  least  equally  probable  view, 
let  us  now  sketch  the  course  that  seems  advisable  in  the  event 
of  the  Theatre  not  only  making  both  ends  meet,  but  showing  a 
considerable  balance  to  the  good.  The  danger  to  be  guarded 
against  in  this  case  is  that  of  reckoning  too  soon  upon  the  con- 
tinuance of  a  prosperity  which  must  always  be  liable  to  serious 
fluctuations.  The  great  point  is  that  the  Theatre  should  always 
have  sufficient  resources  behind  it  to  give  its  employees  a  sense  of 
security,  and  to  place  it  above  the  necessity  or  temptation  to  go 
a-profit-hunting  at  the  expense  of  its  artistic  principles.  We 
suggest,  then,  that  however  prosperous  the  enterprise  may  be, 
no  attempt  should  be  made  to  repay  the  Guarantors  until  the 
Theatre  has  accumulated  in  clear  profit  a  capital  sum  equal 
to  the  original  Guarantee  Fund.  When  there  is  a  surplus  on 
the  workings  of  any  season,  that  surplus  shall  go  to  a  Sinking 
Fund,  to  be  kept  wholly  distinct  from  the  Guarantee  Fund, 
and  left  to  accumulate  at  compound  interest  with  a  view  to 
ultimately  replacing  the  Guarantee  Fund  in  the  economy  of  the 
institution.  While  it  is  in  process  of  accumulating,  deficits 
shall  not  be  met  out  of  the  Sinking  Fund,  but  out  of  the 
Guarantee  Fund  alone.  By  this  means  it  might  not  impro- 
bably happen  that  the  Guarantee  Fund  would  gradually 
dwindle  while  the  Sinking  Fund  went  on  increasing.  In  the 
event  of  the  Guarantee  Fund  having  shrunk  to  ^30,000  before 
the  Sinking  Fund  had  attained  to  £  1 50,000,  the  Trustees  should 
be  empowered  to  draw  on  the  Sinking  Fund  for  the  further 
Guarantee  of  ;^30,ooo  which   they  are  bound  to  raise  if  the 


SINKING    FUND  121 

enterprise  is  to  be  continued.  If  the  Sinking  Fund  at  that 
time  amounted  to  more  than  ;^30,ooo,  there  would,  of  course, 
be  no  necessity  for  the  Trustees  to  make  any  appeal  for  outside 
aid.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  it  amounted  to  less  than  ^30,000 — 
say  to  ;;/"io,ooo  or  ;^i 5,000 — the  Trustees  would  have  to  raise 
the  balance  of  the  requisite  ^^30,000,  or  else  wind  up  the 
enterprise,  in  which  case  the  Sinking  Fund  would  rank  simply 
as  part  of  its  general  assets.  But  except  in  the  event  of  the 
Guarantee  Fund  dwindling  to  ;^30,ooo,  the  Sinking  Fund  must 
be  left  untouched  until  it  amounts  to  ;i^  150,000.  When  that 
point  is  reached,  all  further  surpluses  shaU  go  to  the  reimburse- 
ment of  the  Guarantors,  and  (if  necessary)  of  the  Donor  or 
Donors  of  the  site/  on  whatever  system  the  Guarantee  Contract 
shall  determine.  From  this  time  forwaid,  all  further  deficits 
shall  be  met  by  drafts  on  the  Sinking  Fund,  the  interest  on 
which  shall  now  go  to  form  part  of  the  annual  income  of  the 
Theatre.  If  the  Sinking  Fund  in  its  turn  should  be  reduced 
to  ;^30,ooo  before  the  Guarantee  Fund  is  fully  paid  off,  the 
Trustees  would  have  to  proceed  as  in  the  case  of  the  Guarantee 
Fund — that  is  to  say,  they  must  raise  a  further  ;^30,ooo  or  wind 
up  the  enterprise.  After  the  Guarantee  Fund  had  been  fully 
paid  oflF,  the  constitution  of  the  Theatre,  as  appears  in  the  next 
paragraph,  would  have  to  be  in  some  measure  remodelled,  and 
the  Sinking  Fund  would  be  administered  according  to  rules  to 
be  then  determined,  which  need  not  now  be  forecast.  The 
relations  between  the  Sinking  Fund  and  the  Guarantee  Fund 

•  The  probability  is  that  the  site,  like  the  Theatre-Building,  would  be  granted 
(whether  by  a  public  body  or  by  a  private  Donor  or  Donors)  on  the  understanding 
that,  in  the  event  of  success,  it  should  be  a  free  gift  to  the  Nation,  and  that  only  in  the 
event  of  failure  and  liquidation  should  the  Donor  or  Donors  rank  among  the  creditors 
of  the  enterprise.  But  this  arrangement,  though  desirable,  would  not  be  essential. 
We  have  admitted  (p.  7)  that  the  gift  of  the  building  and  the  gift  of  the  site  do  not 
stand  on  precisely  the  same  plane. 


122  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

might  conceivably,  under  the  arrangement  here  suggested,  be- 
come very  complex,  and  we  repeat  that  the  Statutes  governing 
them  would  have  to  be  carefully  drawn  up  by  skilled  financiers. 
Our  suggestions  are  merely  designed  to  illustrate  the  principle 
that  the  Theatre  must  not  cut  itself  adrift  from  its  sheet-anchor, 
the  Guarantee  Fund,  until  it  has  secured  another  and  equally 
strong  anchor  to  take  its  place. 

As  soon  as  the  Guarantors  and  (if  necessaiy)  the  Donors 
of  the  site  have  been  paid  oflF,  the  Theatre  should  become, 
no  longer  conditionally,  but  absolutely,  the  property  of  the 
Nation,  represented  by  Parliament.  In  that  event  Parliament 
would  of  course  have  the  right  either  to  confirm  such  of  the 
Statutes  as  applied  to  the  new  condition  of  afi"airs,  and  con- 
tinue the  Trustees  in  office,  or  to  remodel  the  constitution 
and  method  of  government  of  the  Theatre.  By  that  time  the 
Theatre  would  itself  have  provided  an  object-lesson  in  the 
aims  and  methods  of  theatrical  endowment,  and  Parliament 
would  have  been,  as  it  were,  educated  up  to  responsibilities 
which,  at  present,  it  would  probably  be  chary  of  undertaking. 

It  is,  of  course,  conceivable  that  the  Theatre  should,  as 
it  were,  buy  its  own  building,  repaying  to  the  Donor,  his 
heirs  or  assigns,  the  sums  expended  upon  it.  But  our  sug- 
gestion is  that  he  should  from  the  first  renounce  all  claim 
upon  the  enterprise  in  the  event  of  success.  In  making  such 
a  splendid  gift  to  the  Nation,  he  would  secure  himself  a  last- 
ing monument ;  whereas  if  he  merely  advanced  the  money,  in 
the  hope  of  ultimate  repayment,  his  name  could  not  be,  in 
the  same  abiding  sense,  associated  with  the  benefaction.  Only 
in  the  event  of  failure  and  liquidation  ought  he  to  rank, 
along  with  the  Donor  or  Donors  of  the  site  and  the  Guaran- 
tors, among  the  creditors  of  the  enterprise. 


GUARANTEE    FUND  123 

On  the  other  hand,  we  suggest  that  if  the  whole  institu- 
tion were  to  be  called  into  being  by  one  man,  he  ought  not 
to  make  a  free  gift  of  the  Guarantee  Fund,  but  ought  to 
charge  the  Theatre  with  the  duty  of  repaying  it,  just  as  if  it 
were  provided  by  a  numerous  body  of  Guarantors.  Whether 
the  cost  of  the  site  also  should  be  repayable  would  be  for 
him  to  determine.  Apart  from  this  question  of  the  site,  the 
constitution  of  the  enterprise,  and  the  methods  of  dealing 
with  success  or  failure,  ought  to  be  practically  the  same, 
whether  it  were  set  on  foot  by  one  man  or  by  many. 

Finally,  returning  to  the  supposition  that  the  Guarantee 
Fund  is  provided  by  a  considerable  number  of  Guarantors, 
we  may  be  asked  what  inducement  our  proposal  holds  out 
to  them.  If  they  are  to  sacrifice  the  interest  on  their  money 
for  an  indefinite  number  of  years,  and  to  run  the  risk  of 
losing  about  half  of  it,  what  privilege  or  advantage  are  they 
to  enjoy  in  return?  We  answer  frankly — none  whatever. 
Their  names  may  be  engraved,  with  those  of  other  benefactors 
of  the  institution,  on  the  walls  of  the  vestibule  ;  but  beyond 
this  they  will  "  get  nothing  for  their  money "  save  the  satis- 
faction of  having  done,  or  tried  to  do,  a  splendid  service  to 
the  English  drama  and  stage,  and  having  helped  to  amend  a 
condition  of  afi'airs  which  is  not  only  artistically  deplorable, 
but  tends  to  be  socially  demoralising.  It  is  quite  impossible 
for  the  Theatre  to  offer  them  any  privilege  which  shall  not 
be  ludicrously  disproportionate  to  the  magnitude  of  their 
benefaction.  Of  course  if  the  whole  Guarantee  Fund  were 
provided  by  (say)  three  contributors  of  ;^50,ooo  each,  it  would 
be  possible  to  give  each  of  them  a  box,  to  remain  his  property 
until  his  ^50,000  were  repaid,  or  the  enterprise  was  wound 
up.     But  it  does    not  seem    probable    that    the    Fund    should 


124  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

be  raised  in  this  fashion ;  and  if  the  contributors  were  more 
than  three,  four,  or  at  the  outside  six,  it  would  be  impossible 
for  the  Theatre  to  give  them  each  a  box.  A  very  simple 
computation  will  show  that  the  sum  might  be  provided  by 
loo  contributors  of  ;^i5oo  each,  3CX)  contributors  of  ;^500 
each,  600  contributors  of  ;^2  50  each,  or  1000  contributors  of 
;^i50  each.  It  is  needless  to  speculate  which  of  these 
possibilities  is  the  most  probable ;  for  whether  the  contributors 
be  100  or  icxx»,  we  do  not  consider  it  possible  for  the  Theatre 
to  offer  them  any  privilege  which  should  not  enormously 
embarrass  its  workings,  while  remaining  a  pitiably  meagre 
requital  of  their  generosity.  Such  attempts  at  recompense  as 
we  have  from  time  to  time  thought  of  suggesting  would 
detract  from  the  disinterestedness  of  their  public  spirit, 
without  affording  them  any  substantial  or  really  desirable 
advantage.  Nor  do  we  believe  that  the  lack  of  material 
"inducement"  would  be  any  real  obstacle  to  the  raising  of 
the  Guarantee  Fund.  When  once  the  other  factors  in  the 
enterprise  are  assured,  on  such  a  liberal  scale  as  to  stir  the 
imagination  of  the  community  and  afford  a  fair  presumption 
of  success,  there  is  little  fear  of  the  scheme  falling  to  the 
ground  for  lack  of  Guarantors. 


APPENDICES 


APPENDIX    A 

DRAFT   OF   STATUTES   AND   REGULATIONS 

[By  "  Statutes  "  we  mean  the  fundamental  Constitution  of  the  Theatre,  which, 
once  accepted  by  the  Trustees,  can  be  altered  only  by  Act  of  Parliament. 
By  "  Regulations "  we  mean  the  bye-laws  laid  down  by  the  Trustees,  which 
they,  and  they  only,  may  revise  from  time  to  time,  as  expediency  suggests. 

The  following  Statutes  and  Regulations  do  not  profess  to  be  exhaustive. 
They  merely  indicate  the  form  which  such  a  Code  might  take,  and  define 
and  supplement  suggestions  already  offered  in  the  foregoing  chapters.] 

STATUTES 

The  site  for  this  Theatre  is  granted  by  and 

the  Theatre  is  erected  and  equipped  by  ,  on  the 

following  conditions: — 

(i)  Unless  and  until  the  contingencies  occur  which  are  provided 

for  in  Paragraphs  21   and   22,  it  shall  be  known  as  the   

Theatre. 

(2)  Unless  and  until  the  contingencies  occur  which  are  provided 
for  in  Paragraphs  21  and  22,  or  those  provided  for  in  Paragraph  28, 
the  ownership  of  the  Theatre  shall  be  vested  in  a  Board  of  Trustees, 
fifteen  in  number,  to  be  constituted  as  follows : — One  to  be  noruinated 
by  the  University  of  Oxford ;  one  to  be  nominated  by  the  University 
of  Cambridge ;  one  to  be  nominated  by  the  University  of  London ; 
one  to  be  nominated  by  the  President  and  Council  of  the  Royal 
Academy ;  two  to  he  nominated  by  the  London  County  Council ;  the 
remaining  nine  to  be  nominated  in  the  first  instance  by  the  Donors 
of  the  site  and  of  the  Theatre.'  Each  Trustee  shall  hold  office  until 
death  or  voluntary  resignation,  except  as  provided  in  Paragraph  4. 
On    the   death   or  resignation   of  a   nominee  of  one  of  the   abovc- 

1  The  method  of  nomination  would  of  course  be  a  matter  for  arrangement  between 
the  parties  concerned. 


137 


128  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

mentioned  Public  Bodies,  that  Body  shall  nominate  his  successor. 
On  the  death  or  resignation  of  one  of  the  Donors'  nominees,  the 
vacancy  shall  be  filled  alternately  by  nomination  of  H.M.  Government 
for  the  time  being,  and  by  co-optation,  all  members  of  the  Board 
having  power  to  vote  in  the  latter  event,  and  the  casting  vote,  in  case 
of  a  tie,  being  given  by  the  Government. 

(3)  The  services  of  the  Trustees  shall  be  unremunerated. 

(4)  The  Trustees  may,  by  a  vote  of  twelve  of  their  number, 
enforce  the  resignation  of  a  member  of  the  Board,  who  cannot  in 
that  case  be  re-nominated  or  re-elected. 

(5)  Should  any  of  the  Public  Bodies  above  mentioned  resign  their 
right  of  nomination,  the  Trustees  shall  transfer  it  to  another  Public 
Body,  selected  by  vote.  In  case  of  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the 
Body  to  be  chosen,  a  bare  majority  shall  decide. 

(6)  The  Trustees  shall  appoint,  from  outside  their  own  number,  a 
Director  and  General  Staff  for  the  Theatre.  The  distribution  of  the 
functions  of  the  General  Staff  the  Trustees  may  from  time  to  time 
modify  by  Regulation,  as  expediency  shall  direct;  but  in  no  event 
shall  the  General  Staff  (exclusive  of  the  Director)  exceed  six  in 
number. 

(7)  All  actors,  actresses,  and  other  employees  of  the  Theatre, 
except  the  General  Staff,  shall  be  engaged  by  the  Director. 

(8)  The  Trustees  shall  have  no  share  in  the  management  of  the 
Theatre  except  through  the  Director,  who  is  their  sole  and  responsible 
Executive  Officer.  Should  he  fail  to  carry  on  the  Theatre  to  their 
satisfaction,  they  have  no  power  to  override  his  arrangements,  but 
must  call  upon  him  to  resign,  on  whatever  terms  his  contract  shall 
prescribe. 

(9)  The  Director  shall  present  to  the  Trustees,  at  such  intervals  as 
they  shall  from  time  to  time  appoint,  a  Report  of  the  workings  of  the 
Theatre,  artistic  and  financial.  This  Report  they  shall  endorse  with 
whatever  remarks  or  censures  they  think  desirable,  and  it  shall  be  the 
Director's  duty  to  give  effect  to  the  views  thus  expressed  or  implied. 

(10)  The  Theatre  shall  not  be  managed  with  a  view  to  commercial 
gain ;  that  is  to  say,  no  person  or  persons,  save  the  Trustees,  shall  have 
any  interest  in,  or  claim  or  charge  upon,  its  profits ;  but  any  surplus 
of  receipts  over  expenditure  shall  be  vested  in  the  Trustees,  to  be 
applied  by  them  to  the  purposes  set  forth  in  Paragraphs  25  and  26. 


STATUTES  129 

(11)  All  employees  of  the  Theatre  shall  be  remunerated  by  fixed 
salaries,  or  definite  payments  for  definite  services — in  no  case  by 
contingent  percentages.  Dramatic  authors,  however,  may  be  re- 
munerated by  percentages  upon  the  gross  receipts  produced  by  their 
plays. 

(12)  The  Director  shall  in  no  case  be  an  actor,  practising  his  art 
for  fee  or  reward.  Should  he  be  a  retired  actor,  the  Trustees  shall 
decide,  by  fixed  regulation  or  otherwise,  on  what  exceptional  occasions 
(and  in  no  case  for  personal  profit)  he  shall  be  allowed  to  reappear  at 
other  theatres.  He  shall  in  no  event  play  any  part  on  the  stage  of 
the  Theatre. 

(13)  The  Theatre  shall  be  conducted  as  a  Repertory  Theatre — 
that  is  to  say,  a  number  of  plays  shall  always  be  ready  for  perform- 
ance, and  shall  be  performed,  in  alternation,  and  no  play  shall  be  acted 
more  than  two  or  three  times  in  unbroken  succession. 

( 1 4)  The  repertory  shall  consist  of  what  are  known  as  "  dramatic 
pieces,"  in  contradistinction  to  musical  pieces — that  is  to  say,  though 
songs  naturally  incidental  to  a  dramatic  story  may  be  sung,  no  essen- 
tial part  of  the  action  of  a  play  may  be  carried  on  in  music.^ 

(15)  Not  less  than  one-fourth  of  the  performances  of  each  season 
shall  be  devoted  to  the  English  Classical  Drama.  The  Trustees  may 
by  special  Regulation  raise  this  minimum,  but  they  must  not  lower  it. 

(16)  The  Trustees  shall  issue  Regulations  stating  what  plays  are 
to  be  regarded  as  belonging  to  the  English  Classical  Drama ;  the 
minimum  number  of  performances  of  such  plays  to  be  given  in  a 
season,  or  month,  or  week ;  the  maximum  number  of  consecutive 
performances  that  may  be  given  of  any  one  play ;  and  otherwise  pre- 
scribing in  its  essential  outlines  the  conduct  of  the  Theatre.  Such 
Regulations  they  may  alter  from  time  to  time  as  expediency  suggests, 
provided  always  that  the  Regulations  keep  within  the  letter  and  the 
spirit  of  these  Statutes. 

(17)  There  shall  be  a  Pension  Fund  attached  to  the  Theatre,  to 
be  raised  and  administered  as  the  Trustees  shall  determine. 

(18)  Before  the  Theatre  shall  be  opened,  the  Trustees  shall  raise 
a  Capital  Sum  of  not  less  than  ^^  150,000,  in  contributions  of  not  less 

'  It  seemed  necessary  to  attempt  some  definition  of  a  "  dramatic  piece."  Certain 
passages  in  Elizabethan  plays  and  masques  might  be  found  to  conflict  with  the  above 
definition  ;  but  otherwise  we  believe  it  may  serve  its  purpose. 

I 


I30  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

than  ;^I50  each.  These  sums  shall  be  repayable  to  the  Contributors, 
in  whole  or  in  part,  as  provided  in  Paragraph  25,  but  the  Contributors 
shall  receive  no  interest  upon  them.  This  sum  of  ;^  150,000  is  here- 
inafter called  the  Guarantee  Fund. 

(19)  The  Trustees  shall  invest  the  Guarantee  Fund,  and  the 
interest  accruing  on  it  shall  be  applied  to  pajring  the  Rates  and  Taxes 
and  Insurance  Premium  on  the  Theatre,  and  to  meeting  the  expense 
of  repairs  to  the  building,  machinery,  fixtures,  and  furnishings,  as 
distinct  from  stage  scenery,  properties,  and  accessories.  Any  surplus 
interest  on  the  Guarantee  Fund,  left  over  after  meeting  all  such 
charges  for  a  given  season,  shall  be  placed  to  a  special  fund  entitled 
the  "  Rates,  Insurance,  and  Repairs  Fund."  If  in  any  season  the 
Rates,  Taxes,  Insurance  Premium,  &c.,  should  absorb  more  than  the 
interest  on  the  Guarantee  Fund  and  whatever  may  be  standing  to  the 
credit  of  the  "  Rates,  Insurance,  and  Repairs  Fund,"  such  deficit  shall 
be  charged  to  the  general  expenses  of  the  Theatre. 

(20)  If  the  general  expenses  of  any  season  shall  exceed  its  receipts, 
the  deficit  shall  be  met  by  the  Trustees  out  of  the  Guarantee  Fund. 

(21)  Should  the  calls  on  the  Guarantee  Fund  at  any  time  reduce 
it  to  one-fifth  of  its  original  amoimt  (that  is  to  say,  to  ;^30,ooo),  it 
shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Trustees  either  to  raise  a  further  Guarantee 
Fund  of  ;^30,ooo,  or,  failing  in  that,  to  liquidate  and  wind  up  the 
enterprise  by  the  method  set  forth  in  the  next  Paragraph. 

(22)  Should  liquidation  become  necessary,  the  Trustees  shall,  with- 
out more  delay  than  may  be  reasonably  advisable,  sell  the  Theatre, 
site,  and  all  accessories  and  appurtenances — in  short,  all  the  property 
vested  in  them — and  after  satisfying  all  legal  and  equitable  claims 
upon  the  institution  on  the  part  of  its  employees,  &c.,  shall  divide  the 
balance  left  in  hand  among  the  Donors  of  the  site  and  building  and 
the  Contributors  to  the  Guarantee  Fimd,  in  proportions  to  be  definitely 
predetermined  at  the  time  of  the  raismg  of  the  Guarantee  Fund, 
and  to  form  part  of  the  contract  under  which  the  Guarantee  Fund 
is  provided. 

(23)  In  the  event  of  liquidation,  the  accumulations  of  the  Pension 
F'und  shall  be  primarily  applicable  to  compensating  employees  of  the 
Theatre  for  the  failure  of  their  expectancy  of  a  pension ;  but  should 
they  prove  inadequate  to  this  purpose,  the  accumulations  shall  be 
supplemented  from  the  general  assets  of  the  institution. 


STATUTES  131 

(24)  On  selling  the  Theatre,  in  the  event  of  Uquidation,  the 
Trustees  shall  insert  in  the  conditions  of  sale  a  clause  debarring  the 

purchaser  from  continuing  to  apply  to  it  the  name  of  the  

Theatre. 

(25)  When  at  the  close  of  any  season  the  balance-sheet  shall 
show  a  clear  surplus  of  receipts  over  expenditure,  such  sm-plus  shall 
be  placed  to  a  Sinking  Fund,  to  be  kept  wholly  apart  from  the 
Guarantee  Fund.  This  Sinking  Fund  shall  not  be  drawn  upon  to 
meet  deficits  unless  and  until  the  Guarantee  Fund  shall  have  been 
reduced  to  one-fifth  of  its  original  amount.  In  that  case  the  whole  of 
it,  or,  if  it  exceed  the  stated  sum,  the  necessary  part  of  it,  shall  be 
applied  by  the  Trustees  to  the  provision  of  the  further  Guarantee  Fund 
required  in  terms  of  Paragraph  2  i .  Unless  and  until  the  Sinking 
Fund  has  to  be  drawn  upon  for  this  purpose,  it  shall  be  suffered  to 
accumulate  at  compound  interest  (each  further  surplus  being  added 
to  it  in  turn)  until  it  shall  have  reached  a  sum  equivalent  to  the 
amount  of  the  original  Guarantee  Fund.  From  this  time  forward,  all 
further  surpluses  shall  be  applied  to  repaying  the  contributors  to  the 
Guarantee  Fund  [and  the  Donors  of  the  site]  ^  in  such  proportions,  and 
at  such  intervals,  as  the  Guarantee  Contract  shall  determine,  until  the 
whole  of  the  Guarantee  Fund  [and  the  value  of  the  site]  shall  have 
been  paid  off. 

(26)  When  the  Sinking  Fund  shall  have  reached  a  sum  equivalent 
to  the  amount  of  the  original  Guarantee  Fund,  it  shall  take  the  place 
of  that  Fund,  the  interest  upon  it  shall  be  applied,  as  was  the  interest 
on  the  Guarantee  Fund,  to  the  covering  of  rates,  insurance,  and 
repau-s,  and  it  shall  be  administered  in  all  respects  in  the  same  way  as 
the  Guarantee  Fund. 

(27)  The  Donor  of  the  Theatre-Building,  though  ranking  as  one 
of  the  creditors  of  the  enterprise  in  the  event  of  liquidation,  shall  have 
no  claim  to  repayment  out  of  the  Sinking  Fund. 

(28)  When  the  Guarantee  Fund  and  the  value  of  the  site  shall 
have  been  completely  repaid,  as  provided  in  Paragraph  25,  the 
building,  site,  endowment-capital — in  other  words,  the  whole  institu- 
tion— shall  ipso  facto  become  the  absolute  property  ot  the  British 
Nation,  represented  by  the  Imperial  ParUament.     The  Trustees  will 

'  See  footnote,  p.  121. 


132  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

in  that  event  formally  lay  down  their  office,  and  it  will  be  for  Parlia- 
ment either  to  reappoint  them,  and  confirm  such  of  these  Statutes  as 
shall  be  applicable  to  the  then  existing  state  of  things,  or  to  reorganise 
the  institution  under  a  fresh  set  of  Statutes. 

(29)  Such  of  these  Statutes  as  do  not  imply  a  definite  contract 
between  parties  may  at  any  time — even  before  the  Theatre  has 
become  the  absolute  property  of  the  Nation — be  altered  by  Act  of 
Parliament ;  but  no  Statute,  having  once  come  in  force,  can  be 
altered  except  by  Act  of  Parliament.  Statutes  which  imply  a  definite 
contract  between  parties  may  be  altered  by  Act  of  Parliament  with 
the  consent  of  all  parties. 


EEGULATIONS 

TO  BE  OBSERVED  IN  THE  CONDUCT  OF  THE  THEATRE. 

By  Order  of  the  Trustees. 

(i)  The  General  Staff  shall  consist  of  the  Director  and  four  other 
members,  namely :  i.  The  Literary  Manager  ;  ii.  The  Business  Manager ; 
iii.  The  Reading-Committee  Man  ;  iv.  The  Solicitor. 

(2)  The  complete  control  of  every  department  of  the  Theatre  shall 
be  in  the  hands  of  the  Director,  except  only  the  choice  of  plays. 

(3)  Plays  shall  be  selected  for  production  or  revival  by  a  committee 
of  three,  consisting  of  the  Director,  the  Literary  Manager,  and  the 
Reading-Committee  Man.  When  a  play  has  been  so  selected,  it  shall 
be  the  duty  of  the  Director  to  produce  it  within  a  reasonable  time. 

(4)  The  Reading-Committee  Man  shall  have  no  other  duty  in  con- 
nection with  the  Theatre  than  that  of  assisting  in  the  selection  of 
plays.  He  shall  be  a  paid  official,  but  shall  not  be  expected  to  give 
his  whole  time  to  the  service  of  the  Theatre. 

(5)  The  Literary  Manager  shall,  in  the  first  instance,  examine  all 
plays  sent  in  to  the  Theatre,  and  shall  indicate  to  the  Reading  Com- 
mittee those  which  seem  to  him  manifestly  impossible.  The  other 
members  of  the  Committee  may  or  may  not  insist  on  reading  such 
plays  for  themselves.  It  shall  further  be  the  duty  of  the  Literary 
Manager  to  conduct  special  negotiations  with  authors ;  to  suggest  and 


REGULATIONS  133 

arrange  old  plays  for  revival ;  to  suggest  foreign  plays  suitable  for  pro- 
duction ;  to  supervise  the  translation  of  such  plays ;  and  to  consult 
with  and  advise  scene-painters,  costumiers,  and  producers  on  questions 
of  archaeology  and  local  colour. 

(6)  The  Business  Manager  shall,  subject  to  the  Director,  control 
all  the  incomings  and  outgoings  of  the  Theatre,  and  shall  draw  up 
a  half-yearly  balance-sheet  to  be  presented  to  the  Trustees,  for  the 
correctness  of  which  he  shall  be  personally  responsible. 

(7)  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Solicitor  to  advise  the  Trustees  as 
to  the  investment  and  management  of  the  Guarantee  Fund,  Sinking 
Fund,  &c.,  and  as  to  contracts  with  the  Director  and  General  Staff; 
also  to  advise  the  Director  as  to  contracts  with  employees,  authors, 
&c.,  and  as  to  other  legal  questions  arising  out  of  the  conduct  of  the 
Theatre.  He  shall  also  act  as  Secretary  to  the  Board  of  Trustees. 
He  shall  be  a  paid  official,  but  shall  not  be  expected  to  give  his  whole 
time  to  the  service  of  the  Theatre. 

(8)  The  Theatre  being  a  Repertory  Theatre,  not  less  than  thirty 
plays  of  full  length  shall  be  acted  in  any  twelve  months,  and  not  less 
than  three  different  plays  of  full  length  shall  be  acted  in  any  one 
week.  A  play  of  full  length  means  a  play  occupying  at  least  two- 
thirds  of  the  whole  time  of  any  given  performance.  But  two  two-act 
plays,  or  three  one-act  plays,  composing  a  single  programme,  shall, 
for  the  purposes  of  this  regulation,  be  reckoned  as  equivalent  to  a 
play  of  full  length. 

(9)  No  play  shall  be  repeated  on  more  than  two  consecutive  even- 
ings. A  third  consecutive  performance  may,  however,  be  given  on  an 
afternoon.  That  is  to  say,  a  play  acted  on  Monday  and  Tuesday  even- 
ings may  be  repeated  on  Wednesday  afternoon,  but  another  play  must 
be  given  on  Wednesday  evening ;  and  so  on. 

(10)  Not  less  than  one-fourth  of  the  performances  of  any  given 
season  shall  be  devoted  to  the  English  Classical  Drama,  and  not  less 
than  one-third  to  the  English  and  foreign  Classical  Drama  taken  to- 
gether. Plays,  whether  English  or  foreign,  over  one  hundred  years 
old  shall  be  reckoned  as  belongino;  to  the  Classical  Drama. 

(11)  Not  more  than  one-fifth  of  the  performances  of  any  season 
shall  be  devoted  to  foreign  plays,  whether  classical  or  modern. 

(12)  Plays  by  American  authors  shall  rank  as  EngUsh,  not  as 
foreign,  plays. 


134  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

(13)  No  play,  old  or  new,  shall  be  performed  more  than  one 
hundred  times  in  a  single  season. 

(14)  At  least  one  performance  of  an  English  classical  play  shall 
be  given  in  every  week. 

(15)  When  a  non-copyright  play  shall  have  been  revived,  the 
Director  may  order  its  repetition  at  any  time  during  the  season  then 
current  and  the  two  following  seasons ;  but  after  that  it  must  be  re- 
considered and  re-sanctioned  by  the  Reading  Committee  for  another 
term  of  three  seasons  before  it  can  again  be  performed. 

(16)  The  actors  and  actresses  of  the  company  shall  be  engaged 
by  the  Director  with  regard  to  their  general  competence,  and  not  to 
their  particular  fitness  for  any  one  part.  No  part,  or  line  of  parts, 
shall  be  guaranteed  by  contract  to  any  individual  artist. 

(17)  No  part  shall  be  cast  outside  the  regular  company;^  but 
the  Director  may  pay  a  celebrated  actor  or  actress  (not  belonging  to 
the  company)  the  compliment  of  inviting  him  or  her  to  appear  at  the 
Theatre  for  occasional  performances,  supported  by  members  of  the 
regular  company,  provided,  however,  that  the  total  number  of  such 
complimentary  performances  in  a  single  season  shall  not  exceed  ten. 

(18)  At  least  six  out  of  the  thirty-seven  plays  commonly  recog- 
nised as  Shakespeare's  shall  be  acted  in  every  season,  and  at  least  sixty 
performances  of  Shakespearean  plays  shall  be  given. 

(19)  No  performer  (except  supernumeraries  paid  by  the  perfor- 
mance) shall  be  engaged  for  less  than  one  year  or  for  more  than  three 
years. 

(20)  No  performer  shall  have  the  right  to  refuse  any  part  allotted 
to  him  by  the  Director. 

1  It  might  sometimes  be  necessary  to  make  an  exception  to  this  rule  in  the  case  of 
a  "  singing  part." 


APPENDIX    B 

PENSION    FUND    SUGGESTIONS 

In  almost  all  foreign  theatres  where  a  Pension  Fund  exists,  it  is 
supported  by  actual  deductions  from  the  salaries  of  the  actors.  This 
system  seems  to  us  undesirable ;  though  where  an  actor  accepts  a 
lower  salary  than  he  would  otherwise  demand,  in  consideration  of 
becoming  entitled  to  the  privileges  of  the  Pension  Fund,  his  claim 
upon  it  is  doubtless  of  the  same  nature  as  though  he  contributed  to 
it  in  the  way  of  "  deferred  pay." 

Our  proposal  is  to  establish  and  support  the  Pension  Fund  by 
assigning  to  it  a  percentage  on  the  receipts  of  non-copyright  plays, 
equivalent  to  the  royalty  paid  to  the  authors  of  copyright  plays. 
This  method  will  have  the  advantage  of  placing  living  writers  and 
classics  on  equal  terms.  As  the  Theatre  will  not  directly  profit  by 
the  fact  that  a  play  is  non-copyright,  the  management  will  be  the  less 
tempted,  as  the  phrase  goes,  to  make  "  Shakespeare  a  blackleg  " — to 
let  the  classics,  by  reason  of  their  greater  cheapness,  crowd  living 
dramatists  oft'  the  stage. 

Assuming  that  non-copyright  plays  would,  on  the  whole,  draw  less 
money  than  copyright  plays,  wo  have  estimated  the  average  receipt 
per  performance  at  ;^i8o.  The  number  of  such  performances  in  the 
season  we  have  outlined  is  164;  but  ten  of  these  would  be  educational 
performances  at  reduced  prices  on  which  no  royalty  would  be  payable. 
Thus  the  number  of  performances  on  which  the  royalty  would  be  pay- 
able would  be  154,  giving  a  total  receipt  of  £2J,'J20.  Ten  per  cent, 
of  this  sum  would  give  the  Pension  Fund  an  annual  income  of  £2y'j2. 

It  is  naturally  impossible  to  forecast  exactly  the  claims  upon  such 
a  fund.  The  limited  number  of  the  persons  who  benefit  by  it  upsets 
the  averages  on  which  actuarial  calculations  are  based.  At  the  same 
time,  we  are  assured  by  the  two  actuaries  who  have  been  good  enough 
to  advise  us,  that,  assuming  our  data  to  be  correct,  the  sums  we  pro- 


136  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

pose  to  allot  to  the  Pension  Fund  ought  to  be  amply  sufficient  to  meet 
all  claims  upon  it.  It  will  be  observed  that,  under  the  rules  to  be 
hereafter  stated,  no  claim  can  arise  until  ten  years  after  the  open- 
ing of  the  Theatre,  during  which  time  the  fund  will  have  been 
accumulating. 

We  had  originally  included  a  somewhat  detailed  scheme  for  pro- 
viding for  the  widows  and  orphans  of  members  of  the  Theatre.  We 
are  advised,  however,  firstly,  that  such  provision  is  very  unusual  in 
pension  schemes ;  secondly,  that  it  would  be  rash  to  pledge  the  Theatre 
to  any  fixed  scale  of  payments  in  such  cases,  so  impossible  is  it  to  fore- 
see the  claims  that  might  arise.  We  have  therefore  thought  it  best 
to  leave  it  to  the  Pension  Board  (hereafter  provided  for)  to  consider 
such  cases  on  their  individual  merits,  and,  where  there  is  evidence  of 
real  distress,  to  make  such  provision  as  seems  reasonable,  and  as  the 
circumstances  of  the  Pension  Fund  permit.  It  might  be  advisable  to 
make  a  rule  that  every  married  man,  on  becoming  "  pensionable,"  must 
insure  his  life. 

It  is  further  suggested  that  the  Pension  Board  should  be  free 
to  exercise  a  wide  discretion  in  relaxing  any  rule  which,  as  applied 
to  any  individual  case,  seems  to  conflict  with  justice  or  expediency. 
For  example,  the  rule  which  fixes  fifty-five  and  sixty  as  the  ages  at 
which  an  actress  and  an  actor  respectively  may  retire  on  a  pension, 
might  in  certain  cases  be  waived  so  as  to  allow  an  artist,  even  tliough 
not  positively  disabled,  to  retire  at  an  earlier  age. 

The  provision  for  "  furloughs  "  ( Rules  4  and  6)  is  prompted  by 
the  belief  that  it  might  often  be  desirable  to  allow  an  actor  to 
accept  an  engagement  for  a  definite  period  at  another  theatre,  with- 
out severing  his  connection  with  the  National  Theatre,  or  forfeiting 
any  advantages  accruing  to  him  from  continuity  of  service.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  "  bonus-percentages,"  provided  for  in  Rule  5 ,  are 
designed  to  make  a  permanent  connection  with  the  Theatre  more 
advantageous  than  intermittent  engagements. 

The  general  rule  for  Civil  Service  pensions  is  that  for  each  year 
of  service  an  official  is  entitled  to  ^^th  of  the  salary  he  is  earning  at 
his  retirement.  It  will  be  seen  that  even  the  lower  rate  of  per- 
centage laid  down  in  Rule  5  is,  on  the  whole,  and  apart  from  bonus- 
percentages,  slightly  more  advantageous  than  the  Civil  Service  rate. 

Many  details   might   have  to   be   regulated  into  which,  at    the 


PENSION    FUND  137 

present  stage,  we  have  not  thought  it  worth  while  to  enter.  We 
trust,  however,  that  the  following  set  of  rules  will  be  found  to  repre- 
sent in  outline  a  practicable  pension  scheme. 


RULES 

I.  A  member  of  the  Theatre  who,  under  the  rules  to  be  herein- 
after stated,  shall  have  become  entitled,  on  disablement  or  superannua- 
tion, to  enjoy  the  benefits  of  the  Pension  Fund,  is  hereinafter  called 
a  "  pensionable  "  member. 

II.  The  Pension  Fund  shall  be  administered,  and  all  disputes, 
&c.,  settled,  by  a  Board  consisting  of: — The  Director  of  the  Theatre 
{ex  officio  Chairman) ;  the  Business  Manager  {ex  officio  Treasurer) ; 
the  Solicitor  ;  and  two  Actors,  whom  the  pensionable  members  of  the 
Theatre  shall  elect  by  ballot  from  among  their  own  number  for  a 
term  of  two  years.  One  will  retire  each  year,  but  will  be  indefinitely 
re-eligible. 

III.  A  member  of  the  Theatre  shall  become  pensionable  when 
(and  not  until)  he  or  she  shall  have  been  regularly  engaged  in  the 
service  of  the  Theatre  for  ten  consecutive  years.  No  engagement 
for  a  shorter  term  than  three  years  shall  count  as  a  "  regular 
engagement "  for  the  purposes  of  this  paragraph.  The  term  "  member 
of  the  Theatre "  is  to  be  taken  as  covering,  not  only  actors  and 
actresses,  but  certain  officials  of  the  Theatre,^  whose  period  of  qualifi- 
cation shall  be  the  same  as  that  required  of  actors  and  actresses. 

IV.  A  furlough  granted  by  the  Director  to  a  member  of  the 
Theatre,  who  remains  under  engagement  to  resume  service  at  the 
Theatre  at  a  definite  date,  shall  not  be  held  to  break  the  continuity  of 
service  required  to  render  that  member  pensionable.  But  the  period 
of  his  furlough  shall  not  be  reckoned  as  part  of  the  necessary  ten 

1  The  Director.  Two  Scenic  Artists. 

Tlie  Literary  Manager.  The  Chief  of  the  Wardrobe. 

The  Business  Manager.  The  First  Wardrobe  Assistant. 

The  Acting  Manager.  The  Wardrobe  Mistress. 

Two  Box-Office  Clerks.  The  Master  Carpenter. 

The  Conductor  of  the  Orchestra.  The  Property  Master. 

The  Stage  Manager.  The  Chief  Electrician. 

The  Head  Prompter.  The  Stage-Doorkeeper. 


138  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

years.  In  other  words,  at  the  end  of  ten  years  from  the  date  of 
his  first  three  years'  engagement,  he  will  have  to  serve  a  further 
period  equivalent  to  the  length  of  his  furlough  before  he  becomes 
pensionable. 

V.  When  a  member  of  the  Theatre  has  become  pensionable  (as 
provided  in  Rule  III.)  he  shall  be  entitled,  on  permanent  disablement 
from  further  service,  to  a  pension  consisting  of  a  percentage  of  the 
salary  he  is  then  earning,  such  percentage  to  be  calculated  upon  the 
following  basis : — 20  per  cent,  in  consideration  of  the  qualifying  term 
of  ten  years,  and  an  additional  i|  per  cent,  for  each  further  year  of 
service  at  any  salary  under  ;!^6oo,  and  2  per  cent,  for  each  further 
year  of  service  at  a  salary  of  ^600,  presumed  (for  the  purposes  of  the 
Pension  Fund)  to  be  the  highest  salary  paid  in  the  Theatre.  More- 
over, a  bonus-percentage  shall  be  added  for  every  fifth  year  of  con- 
tinuous service  (after  the  qualifying  ten  years)  on  the  following  scale : 
For  the  fifth  year  an  additional  i  per  cent. ;  for  the  tenth  year  an 
additional  2  per  cent. ;  for  the  fifteenth  year  an  additional  3  per  cent. ; 
for  the  twentieth  year  an  additional  4  per  cent. ;  and  so  on.  But  in 
no  case  shall  the  sum  total  exceed  two-thirds  of  the  salary  on  which 
it  is  calculated. 

VI.  A  furlough  (as  in  Rule  IV.)  is  not  held  to  break  continuity  of 
service,  but  the  period  of  the  furlough  does  not  count  in  the  reckoning 
either  of  ordinary  percentages  or  of  bonus-percentages. 

VII.  Pensions  are  to  be  calculated  on  fixed  salaries  alone,  not  on 
total  incomes — i.e.,  salaries  plus  acting-fees. 

VIII.  When  a  male  member  of  the  Theatre  ^  shall  have  reached 
the  age  of  sixty,  or  a  female  member  the  age  of  fifty-five,  it  shall  be 
at  his  or  her  option  to  retire,  or  at  the  option  of  the  Director  to  retire 
him  or  her,  on  the  pension  then  accruing  to  him  or  her  under  Rule  V. 
Should  the  Director  think  it  advisable  to  retain  the  services  of  a 
member  beyond  the  ages  stated,  his  or  her  pension  shall  continue  to 
increase,  as  above  provided,  with  every  further  year  of  service. 

IX.  Should  a  pensionable  member  of  the  Theatre  leave  its  service 
voluntarily  before  attaining  the  age  of  sixty,  he  remains  entitled  at 

'  It  would  be  at  the  discretion  of  the  Trustees  to  relax  this  rule  in  the  case  of 
members  of  the  General  Staff;  while  the  Director  might  relax  it  in  the  case  not  only 
of  actors  and  actresses,  but  of  other  employees.  But  in  no  case  could  either  the  Trus- 
tees or  the  Director  overrule  an  employee's  wish  to  retire  at  the  superannuation  age. 


PENSION    FUND  139 

sixty  or  disablement  to  whatever  pension  he  may  have  earned  at  the 
date  of  his  leaving,  minus  all  bonus-percentages  to  which,  by  his 
voluntarily  leaving  the  Theatre,  he  forfeits  all  claim.  Should  he 
return  to  the  service  of  the  Theatre,  the  ordinary  percentage  due  to 
him  shall  increase  year  by  year  from  the  date  of  his  return  on  the 
scale  provided  in  Rule  V.,  and  he  shall  be  entitled  to  a  bonus- 
percentage  for  every  fifth  year  of  continuous  service,  reckoning  from 
the  date  of  his  return. 

X.  Should  the  services  of  a  pensionable  member  of  the  Theatre  be 
dispensed  with  by  the  management  before  he  attains  the  age  of  sixty, 
he  shall  be  entitled  on  reaching  that  age  (or  on  disablement)  to  the 
pension  which  he  had  earned  at  the  date  of  his  leaving  the  Theatre, 
without  any  additional  percentage  for  subsequent  years,  but  with 
whatever  bonus-percentages  he  may  have  become  entitled  to  during 
his  period  of  service. 

XL  An  actor  or  actress  who  has  left  the  Theatre  shall  not  be 
entitled  to  claim  a  pension  at  the  age  of  sixty  or  fifty-five,  unless  he 
or  she  shall  then  have  retired  from  the  stage — i.e.,  shall  have  ceased 
to  appear  for  money.^ 

XII.  The  Pension  Board  shall  decide  all  questions  as  to  whether 
a  member  of  the  Theatre  is  or  is  not  disabled  from  further  service. 
Should  a  dispute  arise,  the  member  in  question  may  claim  to  be 
examined  (at  his  own  expense)  by  three  doctors,  one  appointed  by 
himself,  one  by  the  Director,  and  one  by  the  actors'  representatives  on 
the  Board.  The  Board  is  not  bound  to  act  upon  the  report  of  the 
doctors  or  of  a  majority  of  them ;  but  should  they  decline  to  do  so, 
the  member  may  then  (but  not  till  then)  appeal  to  the  Trustees. 

XIII.  On  pain  of  forfeiture,  no  pension  or  allowance  shall,  under 
any  circumstances,  be  mortgaged  or  assigned. 

XIV.  All  expenses  of  administration  of  the  Pension  Fund  shall  be 
borne  by  the  fund  itself. 

•  It  may  be  thought  that  a  pension  once  earned  is  earned,  and  ought  to  be  paid 
whether  the  artist  is  or  is  not  still  in  active  employment.  But  one  main  purpose  of 
the  Pension  Fund  is  to  prevent  an  actor  or  actress  from  lingering  too  long  on  the  stage  ; 
and  to  suppress  Rule  XI.  would  be  to  defeat  that  purpose. 


APPENDIX   C 

SUBSCRIPTION  AND  BOOKING  SYSTEM 

It  is  felt  that  the  German  Abonnement  system,  whereby  the  "  Abon- 
nent  "  secures  a  special  seat  or  group  of  seats  for  a  definite  series  of 
performances — one  or  more  night  in  each  week  or  fortnight,  or  what- 
ever the  arrangement  may  be — though  probably  practicable  in  the 
Municipal  Theatres  of  provincial  towns,  could  scarcely  be  introduced 
in  a  National  or  Central  Theatre.  The  vast  size  of  London,  and  the 
multipUcity  of  a  Londoner's  engagements,  would  render  it  inappUcable. 
It  would  be  desirable  to  have  one  Special  Subscription  evening  in  the 
week,  like  the  "  Mardis  "  of  the  Theatre-Franc^ais,  for  which  seats  or 
groups  of  seats  should  be  rented  for  the  whole  season  or  half  the  season 
— at  any  rate  for  a  definite  series  of  performances.  The  subscribers  to 
this  special  series  would  thus  make  of  the  Theatre,  on  the  evening  set 
apart  for  it,  a  social  rendezvous  where  they  would  be  sure  of  meeting 
once  a  week  the  members  of  their  "  set."  Ultimately,  perhaps,  two 
evenings  a  week,  or  one  evening  and  one  afternoon,  might  be  devoted 
to  such  subscription  series ;  but  at  first  it  would  be  sufficient  to  try 
the  experiment  of  one  evening  a  week.  As  a  rule,  of  course,  a  different 
play  would  have  to  be  presented  on  each  evening  of  the  series. 

Apart  from  this  Special  Subscription,  an  ordinary  subscription 
system  should  be  introduced,  having  for  its  basis  the  common  principle 
of  "  a  reduction  on  taking  a  quantity."  Every  one  buying  ten  places 
at  a  time  should  save  from  is.  6d.  to  6d.  on  each  place.  What  he 
would  actually  buy  in  the  first  instance  would  be  a  block  of  ten 
coupons,  which  he  could  afterwards  exchange  for  numbered  seats,  one 
two,  three,  or  more  at  a  time,  on  whatever  dates  he  pleased — provided 
of  course  that  there  were  seats  disengaged  to  meet  his  application. 
These  blocks  of  coupons  should  be  purchasable  at  the  Theatre  itself 
and  from  certain  accredited  agents. 

We  beUeve  it  would  be  convenient  for  all  parties  that  the  exchange 


SUBSCRIPTION 


141 


of  coupons  for  numbered  seats  should,  for  the  most  part,  be  conducted 
by  post,  and  have  fi-amed  the  following  set  of  rules  on  that  assumption. 
In  order  that  the  system  may  work  successfully,  it  is  necessary  that 
all  the  seats  in  any  given  part  of  the  house  should  be  (as  nearly  as 
possible)  equally  advantageous,  so  that  subscribers  may  be  willing  to 
leave  the  booking-clerks  to  allot  them  whatever  seats  may  be  available, 
confident  that  in  no  case  will  they  have  to  put  up  with  an  imperfect 
view  of  the  stage  or  an  otherwise  undesirable  position. 


RULES  FOR  SUBSCRIPTION 

(Abonnement) 

(i)  Subscription  seats  are  purchasable  in  blocks  of  ten  coupons 
at  the  following  rates  : — 


Ordinary  Price 

Subscription 

Block  of  Ten 

per  Seat. 

Price. 

Coupons. 

Stalls,  Section  A  (Pront  Rows)     .     . 

7s.  6d. 

6s. 

£z   0 

„           „       B  (Back  Rows)      .     . 

6s. 

5s. 

2  10 

Circle,  Section  C  (Front  Rows)    .     . 

63. 

53. 

2    lO 

„           „        D  (Back  Rows)     .     . 

5s. 

43. 

2    0 

Second  Circle,  Section  E  (Reserved) 

43. 

3s- 

I  10 

Second    Circle,    Section    F    (Unre- 

served)   

23.  6d. 

2S. 

I      0 

Third    Circle,    Section     F    (Unre- 

served)   

2s.6d. 

28. 

I    0 

Holders  of  Series  F  coupons  are  admitted  on  presenting  them, 
like  money,  at  the  pay-box.  All  other  coupons  must  be  exchanged 
for  numbered  seats  before  they  become  available.  There  is  also  a 
shilling  gallery  for  which  no  subscription  coupons  are  issued.^ 

(2)  The  Director  reserves  the  right  to  declare  the  subscription 
suspended  on  a  maximum  of  60  performances  in  each  season.  For 
these  performances  coupons  will  be  available  only  if  accompanied 
by   a   supplement  bringing  their  price  up    to   the  full  price  of  the 

'  For  the  sake  of  the  Special  Subscription  evenings  (see  Rule  4),  if  for  no  other 
reason,  the  Theatre  ought,  if  possible,  to  have  a  certain  number  of  well-placed  private 
boxes  ;  but  until  the  design  is  prepared,  it  is  of  little  use  to  discuss  their  prices  or  the 
conditions  under  which  they  would  be  let. 


142  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

seats,  i.e.,  on  each  coupon  of  Section  A,  a  supplement  of  is.  6d. ;  on 
each  coupon  of  Sections  B,  C,  D,  and  E,  a  supplement  of  is.;  on 
each  coupon  of  Section  F,  a  supplement  of  6d.  On  the  back  of 
each  coupon  is  printed  the  amount  of  the  supplement  necessary  to 
render  it  available  for  these  performances. 

(3)  The  Director  further  reserves  the  right  to  give  a  maximum 
of  fifteen  performances  in  each  season  at  reduced  prices  (Stalls — 
Section  A,  4s.  ;  Section  B,  3s.  First  Circle — Section  C,  3s. ;  Section 
D,  2s.  Second  and  Third  Circles — Sections  E  and  F,  is.  Gallery, 
6d.).  For  these  performances  coupons  of  Sections  A  to  E  inclusive 
shall  not  be  available  at  all.  Coupons  of  Series  F  shall  be  available 
without  supplement  for  the  back  rows  of  the  First  Circle  (Section  D 
seats  on  ordinary  occasions). 

(4)  Thursday  evening  in  each  week  is  or  may  be  set  apart  as  a 
Special  Subscription  evening,  devoted,  that  is  to  say,  to  subscribers 
who  rent  (at  full  prices,  with  no  reduction  for  quantity)  one  par- 
ticular seat  or  set  of  seats  for  every  Thursday  evening  throughout 
a  definite  series  of  not  less  than  ten  weeks.  On  these  evenings  only 
the  seats  not  secured  by  Special  Subscribers  will  be  available  for 
ordinary  subscribers. 

(5)  In  all  the  reserved  parts  of  the  house  one  row  of  seats  in 
every  three  is  devoted  to  purchasers  at  ordinary  rates ;  but  seats  not 
secured  by  purchasers  at  ordinary  rates  before  midday  on  the  day 
before  a  given  performance  may  be  allotted  to  subscribers ;  and  con- 
versely, seats  not  secured  by  subscribers  before  midday  on  the  day 
before  a  given  performance,  may  be  allotted  to  purchasers  at  ordinary 
rates. 

(6)  Every  subscriber  on  first  purchasing  coupons  shall  place  his 
or  her  name  and  address  on  a  register  to  be  kept  at  the  Theatre. 
To  this  address  all  communications  (except  as  provided  in  Rule  10) 
shall  be  directed ;  and  the  Theatre  will  not  be  responsible  for  any 
delay  or  inconvenience  arising  from  the  subscriber's  failure  to  give 
notice  of  a  change  of  address. 

(7)  Every  Wednesday  evening  a  notification  of  the  repertory  to 
be  presented  during  the  week  beginning  ten  days  later  will  be  posted 
to  the  registered  address  of  subscribers  (except  to  holders  of  Section 
F  coupons),  accompanied  by  a  form  of  application  for  seats,  and  an 
(unstamped)  envelope  bearing  the   printed  address  of  the  Theatre. 


SUBSCRIPTION        ■  143 

Subscribers  desiring  seats  will  then  fill  in  the  appUcation-form  and 
return  it,  with  the  requisite  coupons,  to  the  booking-office  before  the 
following  Monday  at  midday.  Until  that  day  and  hour  no  applica- 
tion-form will  be  examined,  nor  can  any  personal  application  by 
subscribers  for  seats  during  the  week  in  question  be  entertained.  At 
midday  on  the  Monday  all  application-forms  will  be  opened,  not  in 
the  order  in  which  they  reach  the  Theatre,  but  at  random,  the 
principle  being  that  up  to  that  hour  no  subscriber  shall  have  priority 
over  another.  This  principle,  however,  is  subject  to  the  exception  set 
forth  in  the  following  rule. 

(8)  Any  subscriber  who  by  sending  in  a  previous  application-form 
along  with  his  current  form  shows  that  he  has  already  applied  unsuc- 
cessfully for  seats  for  a  particular  play,  shall  have  priority  over  those 
making  then  first  application  for  seats  for  that  play.  Two  unsuccess- 
ful application-forms  give  priority  over  one  only,  and  so  forth. 

(9)  Seats  allotted  to  subscribers,  or  the  notification  that  they 
cannot  be  allotted,  will  be  posted  so  as  to  reach  subscribers  (in 
London)  by  the  first  post  on  the  Tuesday  morning. 

(10)  Subscribers  who  have  not  made  application  for  seats  in  the 
way  and  at  the  time  indicated  in  Eule  7,  may  apply  for  seats  per- 
sonally or  by  letter  any  time  after  the  booking-office  opens  (for 
ordinary  as  well  as  subscription  booldng)  on  Tuesday  morning ;  but 
their  chance  of  finding  seats  available  is  obviously  less  than  if  they 
apply  as  above  prescribed. 

(11)  Subscribers  may  at  any  time  secure  any  ordinary-price  seats 
not  already  disposed  of  by  paying  in  coupons  along  with  the  supple- 
ment necessary  to  bring  their  price  up  to  the  ordinary  price  of  the  seats. 

(12)  The  notification  of  the  week's  repertory  will  be  sent  only  to 
the  registered  address  of  the  subscriber.  Tickets,  &c.,  will  be  sent  to 
Avhatever  address  is  given  on  the  application-form.  The  Theatre  will 
not  be  responsible  for  any  delay  occurring  in  the  post,  or  through  the 
chance  misdirection  of  any  letter  sent  to  an  address  other  than  the 
registered  address  of  the  subscriber. 

(13)  Subscribers  who  claim  priority  as  provided  in  Kule  8  should 
write  in  the  upper  left-hand  corner  of  the  envelope  enclosing  their 
application-forms  the  word  "  Priority."  The  Theatre  does  not  under- 
take to  rectify  any  failure  to  grant  priority  arising  through  neglect  of 
this  rule. 


144  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

(14)  Subscribers  may  apply  for  seats  by  ordinary  letter,  and  not 
on  the  forms  provided  by  the  Theatre ;  but  such  applications,  as 
entailing  additional  w-ork  to  the  staff,  will  be  postponed  to  those 
made  in  the  prescribed  form,  and  are  therefore  the  more  likely  to  be 
unsuccessful. 

(15)  Subscription-coupons  are  transferable  in  so  far  that  they,  or 
the  tickets  issued  in  exchange  for  them,  may  be  presented,  or  even 
sold,  privately  and  as  between  acquaintances.  But  every  subscriber, 
on  first  placing  his  name  on  the  register,  will  be  required  to  sign  an 
undertaking  not  to  traffic  publicly  in  them,  to  expose  them  for  sale 
in  any  shop,  bar,  restaurant,  or  public  place,  or  to  hawk  them,  or 
transfer  them  to  any  one  who  shall  hawk  them,  on  the  street,  in  the 
environs  of  the  Theatre,  or  elsewhere.  All  coupons  held  by  any  one 
who  shall  infringe  this  undertaking  shall  thereby  become  null  and 
void,  and  the  Theatre  may  strike  his  name  oflf  the  register  and  decline 
to  sell  him  any  further  coupons. 

(16)  When  dates  for  the  performances  of  a  particular  play  can  be 
fixed  for  more  than  a  fortnight  ahead  (for  instance,  when  it  is  found 
possible  to  determine  that  such-and-such  a  play  shall  be  given,  say, 
every  Tuesday  and  Friday  evening  for  the  next  six  weeks),  this  will 
be  announced  in  the  notification  of  the  repertory,  and  seats  for  these 
performances  may  be  applied  for  on  the  application-form  accompanying 
the  announcement,  or  on  any  subsequent  application-form. 

(17)  Coupons  of  all  Sections  from  A  to  E  inclusive  are  issued  for 
one  season  alone ;  but  unused  coupons  may  be  exchanged  for  coupons 
of  the  following  season  on  payment  of  a  fee  of  2d.  per  coupon,  or 
will  be  bought  back  by  the  Theatre  at  a  discount  of  25  per  cent,  on 
the  price  paid  for  them.  Coupons  of  Series  F  are  not  restricted  to 
one  season  and  cannot  be  bought  back. 

(18)  The  Management  in  no  case  guarantees  the  appearance  of 
any  individual  artist,  though  his  or  her  name  may  have  been  included 
in  the  official  announcements ;  nor  does  the  unavoidable  substitution 
of  one  front-piece  or  after-piece  for  another  imply  the  cancelling  of 
seats  allotted  for  that  performance.  But  when  the  principal  play 
of  the  evening  (or  afternoon)  has  to  be  altered,  seats  will  be  trans- 
ferred, or  money  returned,  at  the  choice  of  the  holder,  and  every 
effort  will  be  made,  by  early  and  prominent  notification  of  the  change, 
to  obviate  inconvenience  and  disappointment. 


[Specimen    NOTIFICATION    OF  REPERTORY  to  be  Posted   to 

SUBSCEIBERS     EACH    WEDNESDAY    EVENING,    ALONG    WITH    BlAXK 

FoBii  OF  Application  for  Seats.] 


NATIONAL    THEATRE 

Wednesday,  February  i8,  19 — 
The  Repertory  for  the  week  March  2  to  March  7  will  be  as  follows  : — 

Monday,  March  2. — The  Critic,  by  R.  B.  Sheridan.     (Messrs.  Tower  Hill, 

Cornhill,    Finsbury,    Gracechurch,    Clement    Dane,    Bethnal    Green ; 

Mesdames    Dalmeny,    Mentmore,    Alnwick.)      And    Sweethearts,    by 

W.  S.  Gilbert.     (Mr.  Savile  Rowe,  Miss  Chatsworth.) 
Tuesday,  March  3. — Hamlet,  by  WillLam  Shakespeare.      (Messrs.  Kingsway, 

Wimpole,  Holborn,    Knightsbridge,    Smithfield,    PaU-MaU ;    Mesdames 

Hatfield,  Blenheim.) 
Wednesday,   March  4  (afternoon). — The    Liars,    by    Henry   Arthur    Jones. 

(Messrs.    Bryanston,   Smithfield,    Lothbury,    Ludgate,  Clement  Dane ; 

Mesdames  Wahner,  Alnwick,  Chatsworth,  Arundel.) 

(Evening)    The  CounteSS  Cathleen,  by   W.   B.    Yeats.     (Messrs. 

Wimpole,   Finsbury,   CornhUl,   Fenchurch,   Lothbury  ;   Mesdames  Tin- 

tagel,  Pevensey,  Knole.) 
Thursday,^    March    5. — Special    Subscription    Evening — Hamlet.     (Cast    as 

above.) 
/Wday,  1/arcA  6.— First  Production  of  The  Chiltem  Hundreds,^  by  .  .  .  . 

(Messrs.  Aldwych,  Langham,  Mark  Lane,  Savile  Rowe, 

Gracechurch,    Finsbury,    Tower    Hill ;    Mesdames    Elcho,    Mentmore, 

Tintagel,  Knole.) 
Saturday,  March  7  (afternoon). — Hamlet.     (Cast  as  above.) 

(Evening)  The  Chiltem  Hundreds.^     (Cast  as  above.) 

N.B. — The  Chiltem  Hundreds-  will  be  repeated  on  the  afternoon  of 
Wednesday,  March  11,  and  the  evening  of  Thursday,  March  12,  for  which 
dates  seats  may  be  secured. 

The  Casts  above  stated  are  subject  to  alteration. 

1  For  the  Special  Subscription  (Thursday)  Evenings  of  the  present  season,  no  Series  A 
seats  are  available  for  ordinary  subscribers,  andionly  a  few  Series  B,  0,  and  D  seats. 

^  For  all  these  performances  of  The  Chiltem  Hundreds  the  subscription  is  suspended. 
Coupons  are  available  only  if  accompanied  by  a  supplement  bringing  their  price  up  to  the 
ordinary  price  of  the  seats  (see  back  of  each  coupon).  Supplementary  payments  up  to 
Three  Shillings,  but  not  above  that  sum,  accepted  in  postage  stamps. 

145  K 


EXTRACT  FROM  SUBSCRIPTION  RULES 


The  Director  reserves  the  right  to  declare 
the  subscription  suspended  on  a  maximum 
of  60  performances  in  each  season.  For 
these  performances  coupons  will  be  avail- 
able only  if  accompanied  by  a  supplement 
bringing  their  price  up  to  the  ordinary  price 
of  the  seats.  On  the  back  of  each  coupon 
is  printed  the  amount  of  the  supplement 
necessaiy  to  render  it  available  for  these 
performances. 

The  Director  further  reserves  the  right 
to  give  a  maximum  of  15  performances  in 
each  season  at  reduced  prices.  For  these 
performances  coupons  of  Sections  A  to  E 
inclusive  shall  not  be  available  at  all.  Cou- 
pons o£  Series  F  shall  be  available  without 
supplement  for  the  back  rows  of  the  First 
Circle  (Section  D  seats  on  ordinary  occa- 
sions). 

Thursday  evening  in  each  week  is  or  may 
be  set  apart  as  a  Special  Subscription  even- 
ing. On  these  evenings  only  the  seats  not 
secured  by  Special  Subscribers  wUl  be  avail- 
able for  ordinary  subscribers. 

In  alljthe  reserved  parts  of  the  house  one 
row  of  seats  in  every  three  is  devoted  to 
purchasers  at  orilinary  rates  ;  but  seats  not 
secured  by  purchasers  at  ordinary  rates  be- 
fore midday  on  the  day  before  a  given  per- 
formance may  be  allotted  to  subscribers ; 
and  conversely,  seats  not  secured  by  sub- 
scribers before  midday  on  the  day  before 
a  given  performance,  may  be  allotted  to  pur- 
chasers at  ordinary  rates. 

Every  Wednesday  evening  a  notification 
of  the  repertory  to  be  presented  during  the 
week  beginning  ten  days  later  will  he  posted 
to  the  registered  address  of  subscribers  (ex- 
cept to  holders  of  Section  F  coupons)  accom- 
panied by  a  form  of  application  for  aeats, 
and  an  (unstamped)  envelope  bearing  the 
printed  address  of  the  Theatre.  Subscribers 
desiring  seats  will  then  fill  in  the  applica- 
tion-form and  return  it,  with  the  requisite 
coupons,  to  the  booking-office  before  the 
foUovring  Monday  at  midday.  Until  that 
day  and  hour  no  application  -  form  will  be 
examined,  nor  can  any  personal  application 
by  subscribers  for  seats  during  the  week  in 
question  be  entertained.  At  midday  on  the 
Monday  all  application-forms  will  be  opened, 
not  in  the  order  in  which  they  reach  the 
Theatre,  but  at  random,  the  principle  being 
that  up  to  that  hour  no  subscriber  shall 
have  priority  over  another.  This  principle, 
however,  is  subject  to  the  exception  set 
forth  in  the  following  rule. 


146 


Any  subscriber  who  by  sending  in  a  pre- 
vious application-form  along  with  his  cur- 
rent form  shows  that  he  has  already  applied 
unsrmcssfuUij  for  seats  for  a  particular  play, 
shall  have  priority  over  those  making  their 
first  application  for  seats  for  that  play. 
Two  nnsuocessful  application  -  forms  give 
priority  over  one  only,  and  bo  forth. 

Subscribers  who  claim  priority  shonid 
write  in  the  upper  left-hand  comer  of  the 
envelope  enclosing  their  application-forms 
the  word  "Priority."  The  Theatre  does 
not  undertake  to  rectify  any  failure  to 
grant  priority  arising  through  neglect  of 
this  rule. 

Seats  allotted  to  subscribers,  or  the  notifi- 
cation that  they  cannot  be  allotted,  wiU  be 
posted  so  as  to  reach  subscribers  (in  London) 
by  the  first  post  on  the  Tuesday  morning. 

Subscribers  who  have  not  made  applica- 
tion for  seats  in  the  way  and  at  the  time 
above  indicated,  may  apply  for  seats  person- 
ally or  by  letter  at  any  time  after  the  book- 
ing-office opens  (for  ordinary  as  well  as 
subscription  booking)  on  Tuesday  morning. 

Subscribers  may  at  any  time  secure  any 
ordinary-price  seats  not  already  disposed  of 
by  paying  in  coupons  along  with  the  sup- 
plement necessary  to  bring  their  price  up  to 
the  ordinary  price  of  the  seats. 

Every  subscriber  on  first  purchasing  cou- 
pons shall  place  his  or  her  name  and  address 
on  a  register  to  be  kept  at  the  Theatre.  The 
notification  of  the  week's  repertory  will  be 
sent  only  to  the  registered  address  of  the 
subscriber.  Tickets,  &c.,  will  be  sent  to 
whatever  address  is  given  on  the  applica- 
tion-form. The  Theatre  will  not  be  respon- 
sible for  any  delay  occurring  in  the  post, 
or  through  the  chance  misdirection  of  any 
letter  sent  to  an  address  other  than  the 
registered  address  of  the  subscriber. 

Subscribers  may  apply  for  seats  by  ordi- 
nary letter,  and  not  on  the  forms  provided 
by  the  Theatre ;  but  such  applications,  as 
entaUing  additional  work  to  the  staff,  will 
be  postponed  to  those  made  in  the  prescribed 
form,  and  are  therefore  the  more  likely  to 
be  unsuccessful. 

Subscription-coupons  are  transferable  in 
so  far  that  they,  or  the  tickets  issued  in 
exchange  for  them,  may  be  presented,  or 
even  sold,  privately,  and  as  between  ac- 
quaintances. But  they  must  not  be  pub- 
licly or  systematically  trafficked  in. 

[Por  fu/rihcr  d-ctails  see  fvU  copy  of  RvUi 
iisued  to  every  Subaoriber.^ 


S 

-x 

H 

w 

CO 

Pi 

c 

Eh 

H 

<! 

W 

o 

w 

14 

H 

CO 

^^ 

J 

o 

<i 

?! 

iz; 

o 

^ 

HH 

is 

H 

o 

<i 

H 

iz; 

O 

c> 


&5 


■a 


°  "I 


^  1 


5!         3 


^ 

09 

€ 

1 

^ 

s 

5 

g 

o 

** 

§ 

, 

&p 

2 

^ 

^ 

g 

o 
o 
e 
>> 

"i 

-2 
1 

1 

S 

^1 

1 

03 

d 

a,' 
1 

p^ 

^ 

a 

0 

•^ 

<« 

^ 

I 

^ 

{^ 

*i 

^ 

§* 

ej 

1 

S 

o 

^ 

^ 

f 

1 

■8 

s 

^ 

00 

0 

« 

». 

^ 

■8 
1 

1^ 

o 

> 

.— Cfl 

^ 

M 

C    fc. 

;^0 

< 

!; 

1            1 

II 

^ 

i 

ae  to 

=  O^ 

S*' 

a 

1 

5 
2 

m 

f*) 

M 

N 

» 

a 

i 

:s 

t 

^ 

s 

Iri 

Z3 

2 

a 

m 

m 

M 

M 

«3 

3 

a 

,-^ 

^ 

. 

1 

o 

1 

il 

.« 

H 

1 

Cs, 

.c  c 

i 
r 

1 

1 

i 

^ 
1 

II 

1 
s 

1 

1 

si 

1 

^ 

t 

4 

s    ^ 


•3    a 


OB'S  _-- 


'    O    K     °0 


sis  « 


147 


[Remarks  on  the  Specimen  Notification  of  Repertory 
AND  Specimen  Application-Form  for  Seats. 

Both  the  Notification  Leaflets  and  the  Apphcation  Forms  would 
be  larger  than  they  are  here  shown — the  Application  Form  three  or 
four  times  the  size. 

It  would  probably  be  advisable  to  indicate  by  the  use  of  a  special 
type  the  plays  which  are  given  with  the  subscription  suspended. 

The  Application-Form  may  at  first  glance  seem  complex  and 
difficult  to  understand;  but  after  using  it  two  or  three  times  sub- 
scribers would  find  it  quite  simple,  and  would  be  able  to  fill  it  in 
rapidly  and  with  ease.] 


148 


APPENDIX     D 


CASTS  OF  PLAYS 


SHAKESPEARE:  "KING  RICHARD  II." 


Richard  II.  . 

.  Mr 

Kingsway 

Abbot     of     WestH  (_  ivr^  -r 

Buke  of  York    . 

JJ 

Throgmorton 

minster     . 

i 

Duke  of  Lancaster 

n 

Ludgate 

Lord  Marshal    . 

.     „     F. 

Bolingbroke 

)) 

Wimpole 

Exton       .     .     . 

„     Tower  Hill 

Aumerle  .     .     . 

Ji 

Hyde  Park 

Scroop      .     .     . 

„     G. 

Duke  of  Norfolk 

ti 

Fenchurch 

Welsh  Captain 

(„     Temple 
1             Barre 

Duke  of  Surrey 

») 

Euston 

Salisbury 

a 

Longacre 

ist  Gardener     . 

„     Pall  MaU 

Lord  Berkeley  . 

>J 

A. 

2nd  Grardener    . 

.     „     H. 

Henry  Percy 

J» 

L. 

A  Groom       .     . 

„     I. 

Ross    .     .     . 

n 

Paternoster 

A  Servant    .     . 

„     J. 

Willoughby  . 

)> 

D. 

A  Keeper     .     . 

„     K. 

Bushey     .     . 

»» 

Finsbury 

Bagot  .     .     . 

»» 

B. 

Queen      .     .     . 

Miss  Elcho 

Green       .     . 

jj 

C. 

Duchess  of  Gloster        ,,     Hatfield 

Fitzwater 

J) 

Knights- 

Duchess  of  York 

Mrs.  Pevensey 

bridge 

A     Lady    to     the 

Miss  M. 

Bishop  of  Carlisle 

)) 

Farringdon 

Queen  .     .     . 

Twelve  per 

'ormances. 

SHAK 

.ESPEARE:  "KIN 

G  HENRY  IV.," 

Part  I. 

Henry  IV.    .     . 

Mr 

Wimpole 

Earl  of  Worcester  Mr.  Euston 

Henry,    Prince    o 
Wales  .     .     . 

■)•■ 

Aldwych 

Earl  of   Northum 
berland     .     . 

> ,,     Lothbury 

Prince  John 

n 

F. 

Hotspur  .     .     . 

„     Kingsway 

Earl  of  Westmore 

jj 

Smithfield 

Earl  of  March  . 

„     Hyde  Park 

land 

Archbishop       ol 

},,     A. 

Sir  Walter  Blui 

at 

)) 

Paternoster 

York    .     .     . 

'49 


ISO                NATIONAL 

THEATRE 

Earl  of  Douglas     .  Mr.  Knightsbridge 

Owen  Glendower   ./"     Somerset 
1            House 

Peto 

Bardolpb       .     . 
Francis    .... 

Mr.  E. 
„     Pallmall 
,,     G. 

Sir        Richard  Ij^^g 
Vernon          ■     .  J 

ist  Carrier    .     .     . 
2nd  Carrier  .     .     . 

„     H. 

FalstafF    .     .     .     .     „      Barbican 
Sir  Michael  .     .     .     „      C. 

Chamberlain      .     . 

„     J. 

Poins Finsbury 

Gadshill  .     .     .     .  i  "      I^ethnal 
I            Green 

Lady  Percy  . 
Lady  Mortimer 
Mrs.  Quickly     .     . 

Miss  Walmer 
„     Blenheim 
;,     Knole 

Twelve  performances. 


SHAKESPEARE  :  "  KING  HENRY  IV.,"  Fakt  IL 


Henry  IV.    .     .     .  Mr 

.   Wimpole 

Bardolph .     .     . 

.  Mr 

Pallmall 

Henry,    Prince    of  1 

Wales  .     .     .     .  /  " 

Aldwych 

Pistol  .... 

l» 

Fenchurch 

Poins  .... 

H 

Finsbury 

Duke  of  Clarence  .     ,, 

B. 

Peto    .... 

•         )* 

E. 

Duke  of  Lancaster      ,, 

Paternoster 

Shallow    .     .     . 

>) 

Throgmorton 

Humphrey  of  Glou-) 
cester  .     .     .     .)   " 

C. 

Silence     .     .     . 

»» 

Cornhill 

Davy  .... 

») 

Longacre 

Earl  of  Warwick   .     ,, 

Knightsbridge 

Fang   .... 

») 

J. 

Earl  of  Weetmore-  ) 
land      .     .     .     .  f " 

Smithfield 

Snare  .... 

>J 

K. 

Mouldy    .     .     . 

»» 

Tower  Hill 

Gower , 

F. 

Shadow     .     .     . 

*         ») 

D. 

Lord  Chief -Justice     „ 

Euston 

Wart  .... 

») 

F. 

Ear!  of  Northum-  ) 
berland           .     .  /  " 

Loth  bury 

Feeble      .     .     . 

•{■• 

Bethnal 
Green 

Scroop,  Archbishop  ( 
of  York     .     .     .  j  " 

A. 

Bullcalf    .     .     . 

.      » 

Temple 

Baixe 

Lord  Mowbray .     .     „ 

G. 

First  Drawer     . 

»» 

L. 

Lord  Hastings  .     .     „ 

H. 

Lord  Bardolpb  .     .     ,, 

White  Hall 

Lady  Northumber 

■|m 

iss  Hatfield 

Sir  John  Colville   .     „ 

E. 

land      .     . 

Travers , 

I. 

Lady  Percy  .     . 

,     Walmer 

Morton     .     .     .     .     „ 

Farringdon 

Mrs.  Quickly     . 

■ 

,     Knole 

Sir  John  Falstaff  .     „ 

Barbican 

Doll  Tearsheet . 

,     Alnwick 

His  Page      .     .     .  Master  X. 

Five  performances. 


CASTS   OF   PLAYS 


151 


"SHAKESPEARE:  "KING  HENRY  V." 


Henry  V.      .     . 
Duke  of  Bedford 
Duke  of  Gloucester 
Duke  of  Exeter 
Earl  of  Salisbury 
Earl  of  Westmore 

land 
Archbishop  of  Can 

terbury 
Bishop  of  Ely 
Earl  of  Cambridge 
Lord  Scroop 
Sir  Thomas  Grey 
Sir  Thomas  Erping 

ham       ... 
Gower 
Fluellen  . 
Macmorria 
Jamy  . 
Bates 
Williams . 
Pistol  .     . 


Mr. 


I- 


[.. 


Aldwych 

I. 

D. 

Lothbury 

0. 

Smithfield 

Somerset 

House 
A. 
E. 
B. 
0. 

E. 

Farringdon 

Mark  Lane 

Tower  Hill 

F. 

G. 

Ludgate 

Fenchurch 


Chorus 


Nym 

Bardolph .... 

Boy 

Charles  VI.  .  .  . 
Lewis  the  Dauphin 
Duke  of  Burgundy 
Duke  of  Orleans  . 
Duke  of  Bourbon  . 
Constable  of  France 
Rambures  .  . 
Grandpr6 

Mont  joy  .... 

Governor   of    Har- 

fleur      .     .     .     . 

French  Soldier  .     . 


Mr.  Longacre 

„    Pallmall 
Master  X. 
Mr.  Finsbury 

,,    Hyde  Park 

„    Euston 

,,    H. 

„    A. 

„  Knightsbridge 

„    L. 

„    K. 

„    White  Hall 

}n    J- 
.,    B. 


Isabel,     Queen    of 

France 
Katharine     . 
Alice   .     .     . 
Mrs.  Quickly 


I  Mi.ss  Inveraray 
.     .        „     Blenheim 


Longleat 
Knole 


Miss  Haddon  Hall 


Ten  performances. 


A.  W.  PINERO :  "  THE  BENEFIT  OF  THE  DOUBT." 


Claude  Emptage    . 
Sir  Fletcher  Port 

wood     .     .     .     . 
The   Bishop  of  St. 

Olpherta    . 
Eraser  of  Locheen 
John  AUingham     . 
Denzil  Shafto    .     . 
Peter  Elphick    .     . 


Mr.  Clement  Dane      Horton     ....  Mr.  B. 


Cornhill 

Farringdon 

White  Hall 
Langham 
Paternoster 
A. 


Quaife      .     . 

Mrs.  Emptage  . 
Justina  Emptage 
Theophila  Eraser 
Mrs.  Cloys 
Olive  AUingham 


„    C. 

.  Mrs.  Dalmeny 
„    Chatsworth 
„    Mentmore 
.     ,,    Carnarvon 
.     „    Tintagel 


Twelve  performances. 


152 


NATIONAL   THEATRE 


HENLEY  AND  STEVENSON:  "BEAU  AUSTIN." 


Beau  Austin      .     .  Mr.  Kingsway 
John  Fenwick  .     .     „  Knightsbridge 
Anthony  Musgrave     „    Savile  Rowe 
Menteith       .     .     .     ,,    Throgmorton 
A  Royal  Duke  .     .     „    A. 

Seven  performances. 


Dorothy  Musgrave      Miss  Elcho 

Miss       Evelina       )  Mrs.  Pevensey 
Foster  ....  J  ^ 

Barbara  Ridley      .     Miss  Alnwick 


SAINT  CECILIA. 


Mr.  Bryanston 
Mark  Lane 
Somerset  House 
Tower  Hill 
Fenchurch 
Ludgate 
Farringdon 
Bethnal  Green. 
Longacre 


Mr.  Temple  Barre 

Miss  Belvoir 

,,     Arundel 

„     Longleat 

Mrs.  Penshurst 

Miss  Haddon  Hall 

,,     Wahner 


Forty-one  performances. 


W.  S.  GILBERT:   "TOM  COBB." 


Colonel  O'Fipp  .  . 
Tom  Cobb  .  .  . 
Whipple  .  .  .  . 
Mr.  Effingham  .  . 
Bulstrode  Effing- 
ham     .     .     .     . 


Sir  Sampson 

gend 
Valentine 
Scandal     . 
Tattle  .     . 
Ben      .     . 
Foresight 
Jeremy 
Trapland  . 


Le- 


Mr.  Holborn 
„     Gracechurch 
„     White  Hall 
Throgmorton 
Clement 
Dane. 


}" 


Footman 


Mr.  A. 


Matilda  O'Fipp      .  Miss  Inveraray 
Mrs.  Effingham      .  Mr.s.  Penvensey 
Caroline  Effingham  Miss  Walmer 
Biddy „     M. 


Six  performances 


OONGREVE:  "LOVE  FOR  LOVE." 
Buckram  .     .     .     . 


■  Mr.  Fenchurch 

,,  Langham 

„  White  Hall 

„  Mark  Lane 

„  Savile  Rowe 

„  Throgmorton 

„  Farringdon 


Snap 


Mr.  A. 
„    B. 

Miss  Belvoir 
„     Knole 
„     Inveraray 
,,     Alnwick 
Nurse Mrs.  Penshurst 


Angelica  .  .  . 
Mrs.  Foresight  . 
Mrs.  Frail  .  . 
Miss  Prue     .     . 


Temple  Barre      Jenny Miss  M. 

Nine  performances. 


CASTS   OF   PLAYS 


153 


HADDON  CHAMBERS: 

Mr.  Parbury      .     .  Mr.  Aldwych 
Mr.    George    Gun- )    _    Q^^^y,^^], 

ning      ....  J 
Colonel  Armitage  .     „    Ludgate 


'TYRANNY  OF  TEARS." 
Mr.  A. 

Miss  Arundel 
„      Walmer 


Evans . 
Hyacinth 
ward     . 
Mrs.  Parbury 


Wood- 


Four  performancea 
MOLlfiRE:  "DON  JUAN." 


Don  Juan      .     . 

Mr 

Langham 

Sganarelle     .     . 

)j 

Mark  Lane 

Gusnian    .     . 

») 

A. 

Don  Carlos    .     . 

jj 

Euston 

Don  Alonso  .     . 

I) 

Lothbury 

Don  Louis     .     . 

>» 

Wimpole 

Francisque    .     . 

,, 

B. 

Pierrot     .     . 

)) 

Pallmall 

The  Statue   .     .     . 

)} 

Fenchurch 

La  Violette  .     .     .  Mr.  C. 
Ragotin  .     .     .     .     „    D. 
Monsieur  Dimanche  „    Cornhill 
La  Ram^e    .     .     .     ,,    E. 

Elvire Miss  Tintagel 

Charlotte Longleat 

Mathurine    •     .     .      „     Alnwick 


Seven  performances. 

"THE  FLIGHT  OF  THE  DUCHESS." 

Miss  Elcho 

Mentmore 

Chatsworth 

Hatfield 

Carnarvon 

Inveraray 


Ten  performancea 
OSCAR  WILDE:  "THE  IMPORTANCE  OF  BEING  EARNEST." 


Mr 

Kingsway 

Hyde  Park 

Savilc  Rowe 

Clement  Dane 

White  Hall 

Holborn 

Paternoster 

Tower  Hill 

Worthing,  I  j^^g^j^j^g^j^ 


John 
J.P 

Algernon  MoncriefF 
Rev.  Canon  Chas- 
uble, D.D.  .  . 
Merriman  .  .  . 
Lane 


Gracechurch 
Throijmorton 


A. 
B. 


Lady  Bracknell      .     Mrs.  Dalmeny 

The  Hon.  Gwendo-  \  -Kr-      -r,  ■,     ■ 
„  .  .  >  Miss  Belvoir 

len  iairrax    .     .  J 

Cecily  Cardew  .     .       „      Alnwick 

Miss  Prism   ...       „      Hatfield 


Five  performances. 


154 


NATIONAL  THEATRE 


SHAKESPEARE:  "THE  TEMPEST.' 


Alonso     .     .     . 
Sebastian      .     . 
Prospero  .     .     . 
Antonio  .     . 

,  Mr.  Lothbury 
„  Wimpole 
„  Kingsway 

,,  Euston 

Trinculo  .     .     . 
Stephano 
Master  of  Ship 
Boatswain    .     . 

.   Mr.  Throgmorton 
.     „    Barbican 
.     „    Longacre 
.     „     Pallmall 

Ferdinand     .     . 

„  Hydo  Park 

Ariel  .... 

■     „    X. 

Gonzalo    .     .     . 
Adrian     .     .     . 

,,  Ludgate 
„  Finsbury 

Miranda    .     .     . 

.  Miss  Bleinheim 

Francesco     .     .     . 
Caliban    .     ,     . 

„  Knightsbridge 
J  „  Somerset 
1                House 

Iris 

Ceres   .... 
Juno    .... 

•      „     M. 
.      .,     N. 
.      «    0. 

Thirty-one  performances. 


LABIOHE  AND  GRUNDY : 

Gold- 


A  PAIR  OF  SPECTACLES." 


Benjamin 
finch     . 
Uncle  Gregory 
Percy .     . 
Dick    .     .     . 
Mr.  Lorimer 
Joyce .     .     . 


':} 


Mr.  Tower  Hill. 

„  Farringdon. 

„  A. 

„  Savile  Rowe. 

„  B. 

„  C. 


Bartliolomew,  a 
Shoemaker 

Another  Shoe- 

maker .... 


i  Mr.  D. 


I   Mrs.  Goldfinch 
I   Lucy  Lorimer 

Three  performances. 


Miss  Arundel. 
„     M. 


SHAKESPEARE:  "THE  TAMING  OF  THE  SHREW." 


A  Lord    . 

.  Mr.  Lothbury. 

Tranio 

f  Mr.  Bethnal 
■  \              Green. 

Christopher 

Sly 

.     „     Pallmall. 

Hostess    . 

•     • 

.  Miss  M. 

Biondello 
Grumio 

.     .       „  B. 

.     .       „  Mark  Lane 

Baptista  . 

,          , 

.  Mr.  Ludgate. 

Curtis 

.   .     „  c. 

Vincentio 

.     . 

.     ,,    A. 

Pedant     .     . 

.     .      „  D. 

Lucentio  . 

. 

.     „     Finsbury. 

Tailor .     .     . 

.     .       ,.  E. 

Petruchio 

. 

.     ,,     Fenchurch. 

Gremio     . 

. 

„    Cornhill. 

Katharine     . 

.     .  Miss  Tintagel. 

Hortensio 

•     • 

.     „     Paternoster. 

Bianca      .     . 
Widow     .     . 

.     .      ,,     Longleat. 
.     .      ,,     N. 

Thirteen  performances. 


CASTS   OF   PLAYS 


155 


Vogelreuter .     . 
George  von  Hart 

wig.  .  .  . 
Pastor  HafFke  . 
Plotz  .... 


SUDERMANN  :  '•  JOHANNISFEUER. 
.  Mr.  Holborn. 


}■ 


Smithfield. 

Throgmorton. 
CornhUl. 


Frau  Vogelreuter  .  Mrs.  Pevensey. 


}•■ 


Elcho. 


TruJe Miss  Blenheim. 

Marikke       (Heim- 

chen)    . 

The  Gip.sy  .  Mrs.  Penshurst. 

Housekeeper  .   Miss  M, 

Maidservant      .     .      „     N. 


Four  performances. 


"THE  BACKWATER." 


Mr.  Langham. 
„     Bryanston. 
„     White  Hall. 
,,     Clement  Dane. 


Miss  Walmer. 
„     Arundel. 
„     Inveraray. 
,,     Carnarvon. 


Four  performances. 


SHERIDAN  :  "  THE  CRITIC 


Sir   Fretful    Plagi- 
ary .... 

Puff    .... 

Dangle 

eer  .... 

Under-Prompter 

Mr.  Hopkins 

Mrs.  Dangle 

Lord  Burleigh  . 

Governor    of     Til- 
bury    .... 
Earl  of  Leicester    .     „     A. 
Sir  Walter  Raleigh     „     B. 


Mr.  Tower  Hill. 

„  Cornhill. 
„   Finsbury. 
„  Gracechurch. 

„  J. 

By  the  Prompter. 

Mrs.  Dalmeny. 

j  Mr.  Clement 
I       Dane. 

Wimpole. 


Christopher  )  j^^  ^ 
atton      .     .     .  i 

} 


Sir 

Hatton 
Master       of       tht 

Horse  ... 
Don  Ferolo  Whisk 

erandos 
Beefeator 
Justice 

Son  ...  . 
Constable  .  . 
Thames     .     .     . 


Tilburina       .     . 
ConfiJaut 
Justice's  Lady  . 
ist  and  2nd  Niece 


\ 


D. 

Bethnal 
Green. 
„  E. 
„  F. 
„  G. 
„  H. 
„  I- 

Miss  Mentmore. 

,,     Alnwick. 

„     M. 
Misses  N.  and  O 


Nine  performances. 


156 


NATIONAL  THEATRE 


W.   B.  YEATS:   "THE  COUNTESS  OATHLEEN." 


Shemus  Rua 
Teig,  his  son 
Aleel  .  .  . 
Maurteen,    a 

dener 
1st  Demon  . 
2nd  Demon  . 
Herdsman  . 
1st  Peasant . 
2nd  Peasant 
Sheogue  . 
A  Steward  . 
3rd  Peasant 


gar 


Mr. 


Wimpole 

A. 

Finsbui-y 

Cornhill 

Fenchurch 

Lothbury 

B. 

0. 

D. 

E. 

H. 

1. 


4th  Peasant .     .     .     Mr.  J. 

Tho-Countees  Oath- 
leen      ... 

Oona,    her    foster- 
mother 

Maire,       wife 
Shemus 

I  st  Peasant  Woman        „     M. 

2nd  Peasant  Woman      „     N. 

A  Sowlth  ....        „     O. 

A  Thivish P. 


I  Miss  Tintagel 

) 

>  Mrs.  Pevensey 

°    i  Miss  Knole 


Six  performances. 


HENRY  ARTHUR  JONES:  "THE  LIARS. 


Colonel  Sir   Chris- 
topher Dering    . 
Edward  Falkner    . 
Gilbert  Nepean 
George  Nepean 
Freddy  Tatton  .     . 
Archibald  Coke 
Waiter    .... 
Gadsby    .... 
Taplin      .... 


>  Mr.  Bryanston 

Mr.  Smithfield 

„  Lothbury 

„  White  HaU 

„  ClementDane 

„  Ludgate 

„  A. 

„  B. 

„  C. 


Footman . 


Mr.  D. 


Alnwick 


Lady    Jessica    N^  I  Miss  Walmer 

pean     ....  J 
Lady       Rosamond  ) 

Tatton .     .     .     .  i 
Dolly  Coke   ...        ,,    Chatsworth 
Beatrice  Ebernoe  .        „    Arundel 
BIrs.  Crespin     .     .        „    M. 
Ferris N. 


Nine  performances. 


SHAKESPEARE:  "HAMLET." 


Claudius  . 
Hamlet  . 
Fortinbras 
Horatio  . 
Polonius  . 
Laertes    . 


Mr.  Wimpole 
„    Kingsway 
„    Hyde  Park 
„    Knightsbridge 
„    Holborn 
„    Smithfield 


Rosencrantz . 

Guildensteru 

Osric    . 

A  Priest  .     . 

Marcellus 

Bernardo . 


Mr.  A. 
„    B. 

,,    Savile  Rowe 
„    0. 

,,    Euston 
„    D. 


CASTS   OF   PLAYS 


Francisco.     .     . 

Reynaldo . 

ist  Player     .     . 

2nd  Player    .     . 

ist  Gravedigger 

2nd  Gravedigger    .     „    H. 


Mr.  E. 
„    F. 

„    Thrc^morbon 

„    G. 

„    Pallmall 


Ghost .     . 

Queen 
Ophelia    . 
3rd  Player 


Mr.  Bryanston 

Miss  Hatfield 
„     Blenheim 
„     M. 


Nineteen  ^  performances. 


Mr.  Aldwych 
,,    Langham 
„    Maik  Lane 
„    Savile  Rowe 
,,    Gracechurch 
,,    Finsbury 


"THE  CHILTERN  HUNDREDS." 

Mr.  Tower  Hill 


Miss  Elcho 
,,     Mentmore 
„     Tintagel 
,,     Knole 
Forty-three  performances. 


Gracechurch 


Marquis  de  River-  )  ^^   ^^ 

olles      .     .     .     .  j 
Lucien    de    River-  1 

olles      .     .     .     .  /    " 

Stanislas  de  Gran-  I  , , ,        , 

\    „     Aldwych 
dredou .     .     .     .  ) 

Hemi  de  Simeux  .       „     Finsbury 


DUMAS  FILS:  "  FRANCILLON." 

Celestin    .     .     . 


Jean  de  Carillac  ,, 

Pinguet  .     .     .     .  I    " 


Tower  Hill 
Bethnal 
Green 


Francine  de  River 
olles      ... 

Th^rese  Smith  .     , 

Annette  de  River- 
olles 

Elisa   .     . 


Mr.  A. 


>  Miss  Belvoir 
,,     Inveraray 
'  >     ,,    Chatsworth 
.     .         „    M. 


Ten  performances. 


T.  W.  ROBERTSON:  "CASTE." 


George  D'Alroy 
Captain  Hawtree 
Eccles      .     .     . 
Sam  Gerridge    . 
Dixon .... 


Mr.  Smithfield 
„    Bryanston 
,,    Mark  Lane 
„    Tower  Hill 
..    A. 


Marquise     de 
Maur    .     . 
Esther  Eccles 
Polly  Ecclea 


St.  ) 


Mrs.  Dalmeny 

Miss  Arundel 
„     Mentmore 


Seven  performances. 


158 


NATIONAL  THEATRE 


SHAKESPEARE:  "ROMEO  AND  JULIET." 


Escalus     .     .     . 

.  Mr.  Euston 

Balthasar      .     . 

Mr.  0. 

Paris  .... 

.     „  Knightsbridge 

Sampson  . 

„    D. 

Montague     .     . 

.     „    A. 

Gregory    . 

.     „    E. 

Capulet    .     .     . 

(  ,,    Somerset 
'  1                House 

Peter  .... 
Abraham       .     . 

„    Pallmall 

Romeo     .     .     . 

.     ,,    Hyde  Park 

An  Apothecary 

„    Longacre 

Mercutio      .     . 

.     ,,    Throgmorton 

Benvolio 

„    White  Hall 

Lady  Montague 

Miss  M. 

Tybalt     .     .     . 

.     „    Smithfield 

Lady  Capulet    . 

„    Knole 

Friar  Laurence 

„    Ludgate 

Juliet.     .     .     . 

„    Tintagel 

Friar  John  .     . 

„    B. 

Nurse .... 

Mrs.  Penshurst 

Thirteen  performances. 

BRIEUX:  "LA 

ROBE  ROUGE." 

Mouzon    .     .     . 

.  Mr.  Fenchurch 

Yanetta    .     .     . 

.  Miss  Elcho 

Etchepar .     .     . 

.     „    Throgmorton 

The  Mother  .     . 

.  Mrs.  Pevensey 

Vagret      .     .      . 

„    Finsbury 

Madame  Vagret 

.   Miss  Carnarvon, 

The  Procureur  . 

.     „    A. 

Madame  Buzerat 

.     .,      M. 

The  President   . 

.     „    Longacre 

Bertha      .     .     . 

.     „      N. 

Mondoubleau     . 

.     „    CornhiU 

Oatialena      .     . 

.     „      Chatsworth 

Ardeuil    .     .     . 

.     „     White  Hall 

Seven  performances. 


BEN  JONSON :  "  EVERY  MAN  IN  HIS  HUMOUR." 


Knowell   .     .     • 

Mr 

Tower  Hill 

Justice  Clement 

.  Mr.  Barbican 

Edward  Knowell 

>> 

Smithfield 

Roger  Formal   . 

.     „    B. 

Brainworm  . 

11 

Temple  Barre 

Servant    . 

•    ,,  c. 

Master  Stephen 

)> 

Savile  Rowe 

George  Downright 

JJ 

Euston 

Dame  Kitely 

.  Miss  Walmer 

Kitely      .     .      . 

ti 

Lothbury 

Mistress  Bridget 

.     „       M. 

Thomas  Cash     . 

)) 

A. 

Tib       .... 

.  Mrs.  Penshurst 

Captain  Bobadill 

>1 

Wimpole 

Master  Matthew 

{■■ 

Bethnal 
Green 

Prologue  .     .     . 

.  Mr.  D. 

Oliver  Cobb  .     . 

{■■ 

Somerset 
House 

Seven  performances. 


CASTS   OF   PLAYS 


159 


"HODGE  AND  THE  VICAR." 


Mr.  Mark  Lane 
Pall  Mall 
Barbican 
Holborn 
Gracechurch 
Cornhill 
Clement  Dane 
Lothbury 


Mr.  Farringdon 

Miss  Mentmore 
„     Knole 
„     Haddon  Hall 
„     Arundel 
,,     Alnwick 


Eight  performances. 


R.  0.  CARTON:  "LADY  HUNTWORTH'S  EXPERIMENT." 


}•■ 


Captain  Dorvaston    Mr.  Bryanston 
Rev.    Audley    Pil-  )  ,,    Bethnal 

lenger  . 
Rev.  H.  Thoresby 
Mr.  Crayll     . 
Gandy       .     .     . 
Newspaper  Boy 


Green 
„    A. 

,,    Tower  Hill 
„    B. 

Master  X. 


Miss  Hannah    Pil- 
lenger  .     .     .     . 

Lucy 

Keziah      .     .     .     . 
Caroline  Rayward 


Miss  Hatfield 

,,     Alnwick 

„     M. 

,,     Belvoir 


Seven  performances. 


SHAKESPEARE:  "AS  YOU  LIKE  IT." 


Banished  Duke 
Duke  Frederick 
Amiens    .     .     . 
Jaques      .     .     . 

Le  Beau  .     .     . 

Charles     .     .     . 
Oliver.     .     .     . 
Jaques  de  Bois  . 
Orlando    . 

,  Mr 

»> 
»j 
»> 

») 

n 

Finsbury 
Lothbury 
X. 

Kingsway 
Bethnal 
Green 
Paternoster 
Euston 
A. 

Aldwych 
Wimpole 
B. 

Touchstone    .     . 
ist  Lord  .     .     .     . 
Sir  Oliver  Martext 

Corin 

Silvins 

William    .     ,     .     . 

Rosalind  .     .     .     . 
Celia 

Mr.  Barbican 
„  Knightsbridge 
„    C. 

„     Farringdon 
„    Hyde  Park 
„    Pallmall 

Miss  Haddon  HaU 
Loneleat 

Phebe  

.,      Walmer 

Adam  .... 
Dennis      .     .     . 

Audrey     .     .     .     . 
Hymen     .     .     .     . 

,,      Alnwick 

Nine  performances. 


i6o 


NATIONAL   THEATRE 


A.  W.  PINERO:  "TRELAWNY  OF  THE  WELLS." 
Theatrical  Folk. 


James  Telfer 
Augustus  Colpoys 
Ferdinand  Gadd 
Tom  Wrench     . 
O'Dwyer .     .     .     . 


Mr.  Wimpole 
,,    Longacre 
„    White  Hall 
„    Savile  Rowe 
„    Tower  Hill 


Mrs.  Telfer  .     . 
Avonia  Bunn 
Rose  Trelawny  . 
Imogen  Parrott 


Miss  Knole 
„    Ohatsworth 
„     Blenheim 
,,    Mentmore 


Non-Theatrical  Folk. 


Vice-Chancellor  Sir 

W.  Gower 
Arthur  Gower 


Smithfield 
Bethual 


!•  Mr.  Ludgate 

„    Smithfi( 
(    ,,    Bethua] 
Captain  De  Foenix  J.  Green 

J) 


Mr.  Ablett 
Chai'lea    . 


Pallmall 

Clement 

Dane 


Trafalgar      )  ,,      _ 

>  Mrs.  Pevensey 


Miss 

Gower 

Clara  De  FoenLx    .     Miss  Alnvick 
Mrs.  Mossop      .     .     Mrs.  Penshurat 
Sarah Miss  M. 


SLx  performances. 


MAETERLINCK  :  "  PELLEAS  AND  MELISANDE." 


ist  Servant 


{•• 


Yniold 


Pelleas     ....  Mr.  Hyde  Park 
Golaud      ....,,  Knightsbridge 

Arkel „     Farringdon 

Temple 
Barre 

Doctor ,     A. 

Six  performances. 


Queen  Genevieve 
Melisande     .     . 

Servants       .     . 


Mr.  X. 

Miss  Hatfield 

,,  Longleat 
f  Misses  M.,  N., 
)      0.,  P.,  Q. 


BULWER  LYTTON  :  "  MONEY." 


Lord  Glossmore 
Sir  John  Vesey 

Sir        Frederick 

Blount 
Stout  .     .     . 


.  Mr.  Lothbury 
I  „  Somerset 
(  House 


Graves 


>  „    Finsbury 


Barbican 
Bethnal 
Green 


Evelyn     .     .     .     . 
Captain  Dudley 

Smooth      .     .     . 
Sharpe     .... 

Toke 

Franz,  a  taUor  . 
Tabouret,    an    up 

holsterer   . 


Mr.  Aldwych 
>  ,,    Bryanston 

„    Longacre 
„   A. 
,.    B. 


:}•• 


c. 


CASTS   OF   PLAYS 


i6i 


MacFinch,  a  jewel-  (.  -sr  .  -p) 
ler ) 

MacStucco,      an  ) 
architect    .     .     .  i    " 

Kite,       a      horse- 
dealer  . 


':}» 


Crimson,     a      por-  ) 

trait-painter  .     .  f   " 
Grab,  a  publisher  .      „ 


E. 

F. 

G. 
H. 


Patent,     a     coach-  )  , ,     _ 


builder 
An  Old  Member 

Lady  Franklin . 
Georgina  Vesey 
Clara  Douglas 


Two  performances. 


/■ 


■{ 


„     Temple 
Barre 


,  Miss  Knole 
„     Walmer 
,,     Arundel 


W.  S.  GILBERT:  "SWEETHEARTS." 


Mr.  Spreadbrow     .  Mr.  Savile  Rowe 
f  „   Temple 
'  (  Barre 


Wilcox 


Miss  Northcott 
Ruth  .     .     .     . 


Miss  Chats- 
worth 
„     M. 


Maurteen  Bruin 


Shawn  Bruin 
Father  Hart 


W.  B.  YEATS:  "THE  LAND  OF  HEART'S  DESIRE." 

Bridget  Bruin  .     ,     Miss  Hatfield 
Maire  Bruin      .     .        ,,     Longleat 
Fairy  Child ...        „     X. 


..{ 


Mr.  Temple 
Barre 
,,  Knightsbridge 
„     Holborn 


Count  Federigo 
Filippo    .     .     .     .|   " 


TENNYSON  :  "  THE  FALCON." 

Monna  Giovanna  .     Miss  Elcho 
Elisabetta    .     .     .     Mrs.  Pevensey 


Mr.  Aldwych 
Temple 
Barre 


King  Rene  . 
Count  Tristan 
Sir  GeoflFrey 
Sir  Almeric  . 
Ebn  Jahia    . 


HERZ  AND  WILLS  :  "  lOLANTHE." 

Mr.  Holborn  Bertrand      .     .     .     Mr.  C. 

Aldwych 

Martha    ....     Miss  M. 

Haddon 
HaU 


B. 

Cornhill 


lolanthe 


{  " 


FREDERICK  FENN  :  "  JUDGED  BY  APPEARANCES." 


Arthur  Denison 
A  Burglar    .     . 


Mr.  Grace- 
church 
,,     Euston 


A  Constable 
Helen  Denison 


Mr.  A. 

Miss  Arundel 
L 


i62  NATIONAL   THEATRE 


"THE 

SPARTAN." 

Mr 

Langham 

Mrs.  Dalmeny 

)) 

Clement  Dane 

Miss  Inveraray 

n 

Gracechurch 

„     Carnarvon 

)) 

Paternoster 

"AT  THE 

DOCK  GATES." 

Mr 

Holborn 

Miss  Mentmore 

>» 

Bryanston 

„     Haddon  HaU 

1) 

Pallmall 

Mrs.  Penshurst 

11 

Cornhill 

Miss  Carnarvon 

PARTS  PLAYED  BY  PRINCIPAL  MEMBERS  OF  THE 

COMPANY. 

Mr.  KixGswAY.  Richard  II.,  Hotspur,  Beau  Austin,  Prospero,  Hamlet, 
Jaques.     Part  in  one  New  Play.     (loo  performances.) 

Mr.  Aldwych.  Prince  of  Wales  (Henry  IV.,  Parts  i  and  2),  Henry 
v.,  Mr.  Parbury  (Tyi-anny  of  Tears),  Orlando,  Alfred  Evelyn, 
Count  Federigo  (The  Falcon),  Tristan  (lolanthe).  Part  in  one 
New  Play.     (75  performances.) 

Mr.  Langham.  John  Allingham  (The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt),  Valen- 
tine (Love  for  Love),  Don  Juan.  Parts  in  three  New  Plays. 
(83  performances.) 

Mr.  Mark  Lane.  Fluellen,  Tattle  (Love  for  Love),  Sganarelle  (Don 
Juan),  Grumio,  Eccles  (Caste).  Parts  in  three  New  Plays. 
(138  performances.) 

Mr.  LuDGATE.  John  of  Gaunt,  Williams  (Henry  V.),  Colonel  Armi- 
tage  (Tyranny  of  Tears),  Gonzalo  (Tempest),  Baptista  (Taming  of 
the  Shrew),  Archibald  Coke  (The  Liars),  Marquis  de  Riverolles 
(Francillon),  Friar  Laurence,  Sir  William  Gower  (Trelawny). 
Part  in  one  New  Play.     (149  performances.) 

Mr.  WiMPOLE.  Bolingbroke,  Hemy  IV.,  Don  Louis  (Don  Juan), 
Sebastian  (The  Tempest),  Governor  of  Tilbury  (The  Critic), 
Shemus  Rua  (Countess  Cathleen),  Claudius  (Hamlet),  Bobadil 
(Every  Man  in  his  Humour),  Adam  (As  You  Like  It).  (123 
performances.) 


CHARACTER   LISTS  163 

Mr.  Fenchurch.  Duke  of  Norfolk  (Richard  II.),  Pistol  (Henry  IV., 
Part  2,  and  Henry  V.),  Sir  Sampson  Legend  (Love  for  Love), 
Statue  (Don  Juan),  Petruchio,  ist  Demon  (Countess  Cathleen), 
Mouzon  (La  Robe  Rouge).  Part  in  one  New  Play.  ( 1 1  o 
performances.) 

Mr.  Barbican.  FalstafF,  Stephano  (The  Tempest),  Justice  Clement 
(Every  Man  in  his  Humour),  Touchstone,  Stout  (Money).  Part 
in  one  New  Play.     (74  performances.) 

Mr.  Bryansto.v.  Sir  Christopher  Dering  (The  Liars),  Ghost  (Hamlet), 
Captain  Hawtree  (Caste),  Captain  Dorvaston  (Lady  Huntworth's 
Experiment),  Dudley  Smooth  (Money).  Parts  in  three  New 
Plays.     (100  performances.) 

Mr.  HoLBORN.  Colonel  OTipp  (Tom  Cobb),  Vogelreuter  (Johannis- 
feuer),  Polonius,  Father  Hart  (Land  of  Heart's  Desire),  King 
Ren^  (lolanthe;.     Parts  in  three  New  Plays.    (74  performances.) 

Mr.  Somerset  House.  Owen  Glendower,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury (Henry  V.),  Caliban,  Capulet,  Oliver  Cobb  (Every  Man  in 
his  Humour),  Sir  John  Vesey  (Money).  Part  in  one  New  Play. 
(116  performances.) 

Mr.  Pallmall.  1st  Gardener  (Richard  II.),  Bardolph  (Henry  IV., 
Part  I ,  Part  2 ;  Henry  V.),  Pierrot  (Don  Juan),  Boatswain 
(Tempest),  Sly  (Taming  of  the  Shrew),  ist  Gravedigger,  Peter 
(Romeo  and  Juliet),  Mr.  Ablett  (Trelawny).  Parts  in  two  New 
Plays.     (156  performances.) 

Mr.  Tower  Hill.  Exton  (Richard  II.),  Mouldy  (Henry  IV.,  Part  2), 
Macmorris  (Henry  V.),  Benjamin  Goldfinch  (A  Pair  of  Spec- 
tacles), Sir  Fretful  Plagiary  (The  Critic),  Jean  de  CarUlac 
(Francillon),  Sam  Gerridge  (Caste),  Knowell  (Every  Man  in  his 
Humour),  Mr.  Crayll  (Lady  Huntworth's  Experiment),  O'Dwyer 
(Trelawny).     Parts  in  three  New  Plays.     (170  performances.) 

Mr.  Savile  Rowe.  Anthony  Musgrave  (Beau  Austin),  Ben  (Love 
for  Love),  Dick  (A  Pair  of  Spectacles),  Osric,  Stephen  (Every 
Man  in  his  Humour),  Tom  Wrench  (Trelawny),  Mr.  Spreadbrow 
(Sweethearts).     Parts  in  two  New  Plays.     (112  performances.) 

Mr.  Gracechurch.  Tom  Cobb,  George  Gunning  (Tyranny  of  Tears), 
Algernon  Moncrieff  (Importance  of  being  Earnest),  Sneer  (The 
Critic),  Lucien  (Francillon),  Denison  (Judged  by  Appearances). 
Parts  in  three  New  Plays.     (loi  performances.) 


i64  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

Mr.  Clement  Daxe.  Claude  Emptage  (The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt), 
Bulstrode  Effingham  (Tom  Cobb),  Burleigh  (The  Critic),  Freddy 
Tatton  (The  Liars),  Charles  (Trelawny  of  the  Wells).  Parts  in 
four  New  Plays.     (72  performances.) 

Mr.  Throgmorton.  Duke  of  York  (Richard  II.),  Shallow,  Menteith 
(Beau  Austin),  Mr.  Effingham  (Tom  Cobb),  Foresight  (Love  for 
Love),  Chasuble  (Importance  of  being  Earnest),  Trinculo,  Pastor 
Haftke  (Johannisfeuer),  ist  Player  (Hamlet),  Mercutio,  Etche- 
par  (La  Robe  Rouge).     (118  performances.) 

Mr.  Hyde  Park.  Aumerle,  Earl  of  March  (Henry  IV.,  Part  i), 
Dauphin  (Henry  V.),  Ferdinand  (The  Tempest),  Fortinbras, 
Romeo,  Silvius  (As  You  Like  It),  Pelleas  (Pelleas  and  Melis- 
sande).     Part  in  one  New  Play.     (130  performances,) 

Mr.  CoRNHiLL.  Silence,  Sir  Fletcher  Portwood  (The  Benefit  of  the 
Doubt),  M.  Dimanche  (Don  Juan),  Gremio  (The  Taming  of  the 
Shrew),  Plotz  (Johannisfeuer),  Puff  (The  Critic),  Mondoubleau 
(La  Robe  Rouge),  Ebn  Jahia  (lolanthe).  Parts  in  two  New 
Plays.     (82  performances.) 

Mr.  White  Hall.  Lord  Bardolph  (Hem-y  IV.,  Part  2),  Montjoy 
(Henry  V.),  Eraser  of  Locheen  (The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt), 
Whipple  (Tom  Cobb),  Scandal  (Love  for  Love),  George  Nepean 
(The  Liars),  Benvolio,  Ardeuil  (La  Robe  Rouge),  Gadd  (Tre- 
lawny).    Parts  in  two  New  Plays.     (9 1  performances.) 

Mr.  Bethnal  Green.  Gadshill  (Henry  IV.,  Part  i).  Feeble  (Henry 
IV.,  Part  2),  Tranio,  Don  Ferolo  Whiskerandos  (The  Critic),  Pin- 
guet  (Francillon),  Matthew  (Every  Man  in  his  Humour),  Rev. 
Audrey  Pillenger  (Lady  Huntworth's  Experiment),  Le  Beau  (As 
You  Like  It),  Graves  (Money).  Part  in  one  New  Play.  (131 
performances.) 

Mr.  Smithfield.  Westmoreland  (Henry  IV.,  Part  i ,  Part  2  ;  Henry 
v.),  Worthing  (The  Importance  of  being  Earnest),  Hartwig 
(Johannisfeuer),  Edward  Falkner  (The  Liars),  George  D'Alroy 
(Caste),  Tybalt,  Edward  KnoweU  (Every  Man  in  his  Humour), 
Arthur  Gower  (Trelawny).     (97  performances.) 

Miss  Elcho.  Queen  (Richard  II.),  Dorothy  Musgrave  (Beau  Austin), 
Marikke  (Johannisfeuer),  Yanetta  (La  Robe  Rouge),  Monna 
Giovanna  (The  Falcon).  Parts  in  two  New  Plays.  (9 1  perform- 
ances.) 


CHARACTER   LISTS  165 

Miss  Belvoib.  Angelica  (Love  for  Love),  Gwendolen  Fairfax  (Impor- 
tance of  being  Earnest),  Francine  de  RiveroUes  (Francillon), 
Caroline  Rayward  (Lady  Huntworth's  Experiment).  Part  in 
one  New  Play.     (72  performances.) 

Miss  Mentmore.  Theophila  Eraser  (The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt),  Til- 
burina  (The  Critic),  Polly  Eccles  (Caste),  Imogen  Parrott  (Tre- 
lawny).     Parts  in  four  New  Plays,     (i  06  performances.) 

Mrs.  Penshurst.  Nurse  (Love  for  Love),  The  Gipsy  (Johannisfeuer), 
Nurse  (Romeo  and  Juliet),  Tib  (Every  Man  in  his  Humour),  Mrs. 
Mossop  (Trelawny).  Parts  in  two  New  Plays.  (89  perform- 
ances.) 

Miss  KxoLE  Mrs.  Quickly,  Mrs.  Foresight  (Love  for  Love),  Maire 
(Countess  Cathleen),  Lady  Capulet,  Mrs.  Telfer  (Trelawny),  Lady 
Franklin  (Money).  Parts  in  two  New  Plays.  (78  perform- 
ances.) 

Mrs.  Dalmexy.  Mrs.  Emptage  (The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt),  Lady 
Bracknell  (Importance  of  being  Earnest),  Marquise  (Caste),  Mrs. 
Dangle  (Critic).     Part  in  one  New  Play.     (41  performances.) 

Miss  Inveraray.  Isabel  (Henry  V.),  Matilda  (Tom  Cobb),  Mrs.  Trail 
(Love  for  Love),  Therese  Smith  (Francillon).  Parts  in  three 
New  Plays.     (57  performances.) 

Miss  TiNTAGEL.  Olive  (The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt),  Elvira  (Don  Juan), 
Katharine  (Taming  of  the  Shrew),  Countess  Cathleen,  Juliet. 
Part  in  one  New  Play.     (94  performances.) 

Miss  Walmer.  Lady  Percy,  Caroline  (Tom  Cobb),  Mrs.  Parbury 
(Tyranny  of  Tears),  Lady  Jessica  (The  Liars),  Dame  Kately  (Every 
Man  in  his  Humour),  Phebe  (As  You  Like  It),  Georgina  (Money). 
Parts  in  two  New  Plays.     (99  performances.) 

Miss  Blenheim.  Lady  Mortimer,  Katherine  (Henry  V.),  Miranda, 
Trude  (Johannisfeuer),  Ophelia,  Rose  Trelawny.  (82  perform- 
ances.) 

Miss  Longleat.  Alice  (Henry  V.),  Charlotte  (Don  Juan),  Bianca 
(Taming  of  the  Shrew),  Celia,  Melisande,  Maire  Bruin  (The  Land 
of  Heart's  Desire).     Part  in  one  New  Play.     (94  performances.) 

Miss  Haddon  Hall.  Chorus  (Henry  V.),  Rosalind,  lolanthe.  Parts 
in  three  New  Plays.     (87  performances.) 

Miss  Arundel.  Hyacinth  (Tyranny  of  Tears),  Mrs.  Goldfinch  (Pair 
of  Spectacles),  Beatrice  Ebernoe  (The  Liars),  Esther  Eccles,  Clara 


i66  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

Douglas  (Money),  Helen  (Judged  by  Appearances).  Parts  in 
three  New  Plays.     (86  performances.) 

Miss  Carnarvon.  Mrs.  Cloys  (The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt),  Madame 
Vagret  (La  Robe  Rouge).  Parts  in  four  New  Plays.  (52  per- 
formances.) 

Mrs.  Pevensey.  Duchess  of  York  (Richard  II.),  Miss  Foster  (Beau 
Austin),  Mrs.  Effingham  (Tom  Cobb),  Frau  Vogelreuter  (Johan- 
nisfeuer),  Oona  (Countess  Cathleen),  The  Mother  (La  Robe 
Rouge),  Miss  Gower  (Trelawny),  Elisabetta  (The  Falcon).  (64 
performances.) 

Miss  Alnwick.  Doll  Tearsheet,  Barbara  Ridley  (Beau  Austin),  Miss 
Prue  (Love  for  Love),  Mathurine  (Don  Juan),  Cecily  Cardew 
(Importance  of  being  Earnest),  Confidant  (Critic),  Lady  Rosamond 
(The  Liars),  Lucy  (Lady  Huntworth's  Experiment),  Audrey,  Clara 
(Trelawny).     Part  in  one  New  Play.     (81  performances.) 

Miss  Chatsworth.  Justina  (The  Benefit  of  the  Doubt),  Dolly  Coke 
(The  Liars),  Annette  (Francillon),  Catialena  (La  Robe  Rouge), 
Avonia  Bunn  (Trelawny),  Miss  Northcott  (Sweethearts).  Part 
in  one  New  Play.     (70  performances.) 

Miss  Hatfield.  Duchess  of  Gloster  (Richard  II.),  Lady  Northumber- 
land, Miss  Prism  (Importance  of  being  Earnest),  Queen  (Hamlet), 
Miss  Pillenger  (Lady  Huntworth's  Experiment),  Queen  (Pelleas 
and  Melisande),  Bridget  (The  Land  of  Heart's  Desire).  Part  in 
one  New  Play.     (72  performances.) 


APPENDIX  E 

THE    THEORY    OF    THEATRICAL    ENDOWMENT: 
EXTRACTS  FROM  SPEECHES  AND  ARTICLES. 

John  Hare  :  Speech  at  the  Royal  Academy  Banquet, 
April  30,  1904. 

And  now,  Mr.  President,  may  I  be  forgiven  if  I  take  this  oppor- 
tunity to  make  one  little  plea  on  behalf  of  the  Cinderella  of  the  Arts — 
the  Drama.  True,  her  sisters  have  not  been  either  haughty  or  unkind, 
but  she  still  awaits  her  fairy  prince  to  take  her  by  the  hand,  to  raise 
her  from  the  basement,  and  give  her  the  privileges  enjoyed  by  those 
more  favoured.  In  the  presence  of  so  many  distinguished  members 
of  the  Legislature  I  would  venture  to  express  a  hope  that  on  some  fair 
spring  afternoon  when,  free  from  the  graver  cares  of  State,  their  minds 
may  lightly  turn  to  thoughts  of  love — to  love  of  the  arts  (cheers) — 
they  may  help  us  to  the  fulfilment  of  our  legitimate  aspirations,  the 
endowment  of  a  National  Theatre — a  theatre  which  should  uphold 
the  noblest  traditions  of  the  British  stage,  where  the  best  and  worthiest 
dramas  of  British  authors  should  be  performed,  and  to  which  a  sound 
school  of  gratuitous  dramatic  teaching  should  be  attached.  (Cheers.) 
Such  an  institution  would  at  once  raise  the  dignity  of  the  drama  to 
the  level  it  occupies  in  other  great  nations  of  the  world,  and  would 
help  to  check  those  malignant  growths  which  are  poisoning  and 
undermining  our  very  existence,  and  making  our  stage  a  byword  and 
reproach.     (Cheers.) 

A.  W.  PiNERO :  Speech  to  the  Pen  and  Pencil  Club,  Edinburgh, 
February  25,  1903. 

Of  course  it  is  the  case  that  every  theatrical  season  does  not  pro- 
duce a  masterpiece  ;  well,  this  country  is  not  alone  in  that  respect.     A 

fine  play  is  the  rarest  product  of  any  country.     But  where  other  coun- 

167 


i68  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

tries  are  ahead  of  us — at  least,  I  hold  so — is  that  when  a  fine  play  is 
produced  they  do  something  for  it.  They  preserve  it ;  they  take  a 
reasonable  amount  of  pride  in  it ;  they  do  not  allow  it,  when  it  has 
once  been  seen  and  admired,  to  lie  neglected,  forgotten  ;  they  take 
good  care  that,  from  time  to  time,  it  shall  be  displayed  as  evidence  of 
what  they  can  do  in  that  particular  department  of  art  and  literature. 
And  there  you  have,  in  a  nutshell,  one  of  the  great  uses — I  do  not  by 
any  means  say  the  only  use — of  a  theatre  which,  whether  established 
by  the  State,  or  by  a  municipal  corporation,  or  by  private  munificence, 
shall  be  independent  of  the  purely  commercial  conditions  which  too 
frequently  govern  the  drama  in  Great  Britain.  Yes,  but  you  will  ask 
— Have  we  existing  in  Great  Britain  sufficient  material  to  stock  such 
a  shop  ?  I  think  we  have.  I  think  you  would  find  that,  given  the 
shop — given  a  National  or  Repertory  Theatre — you  could  make,  even 
at  the  start,  a  highly  respectable  show.  In  short,  I  believe  firmly  that, 
under  the  more  favourable  conditions  I  have  indicated,  it  would  be 
discovered  that  the  maligned  British  drama  is  a  thing  not  to  be  so  very 
much  ashamed  of  after  all. 

Henry  Arthur  Jones.     "  The  Recognition  of  the  Drama  by  the 
State."     Nineteenth  Century,  March  1904. 

And  now  at  last  we  have  come  to  the  moment  when  it  is  plain 
to  everybody  that  the  system  is  not  working,  and  cannot  be  got  to 
work ;  and  that  if  the  EngUsh  drama  and  the  English  stage  are  to  be 
kept  alive  in  our  midst,  if  all  the  golden  leisure  and  evening  hours  of 
the  English  people  are  not  to  be  wasted  in  the  emptiest,  tawdriest 
tomfoolery,  if  this  is  to  be  avoided,  "  something  must  be  done ! " 
But  what?  .  .  . 

We  have  made  great  progress  towards  a  National  Theatre  during 
the  last  few  years,  or  at  least  we  have  made  very  great  progress 
towards  the  necessity  for  a  National  Theatre.  We  have  made  such 
progress  that  we  seem  to  be  irresistibly  and  instinctively  moving 
towards  it,  drawn  by  hands  that  we  cannot  see,  and  called  by 
whisperings  from  a  future  not  very  far  away.  I  am  sure  that  the 
establishment  of  a  National  Theatre  should  be  the  fervent  hope,  the 
object  of  every  actor's,  and  every  dramatist's,  ambition.  And  if  we 
can  once  get  our  root  idea  to  catch  fire  and  blaze,  a  National  Theatre 


THEORY   OF   ENDOWMENT  169 

must  follow  as  the  night  the  day.  I  believe  it  is  coming.  Our  great 
care  must  be  to  see  that  no  abortive  or  premature  attempt  is  made 
to  start  it  on  wrong  lines,  or  under  wrong  management,  or  without 
sufficient  security.  A  false  step  made  at  this  moment,  an  unworkable 
scheme  started  in  a  crude  way,  blundering  along  for  a  few  months  or 
years  to  certain  disaster,  would  be  the  greatest  misfortune  that  could 
just  now  befall  the  English  drama. 

Sydney  Lee  :  "  Shakespeare  and  the  Modern  Stage." 
Nitieteenth  Century,  January  1900. 

It  is  a  tradition  of  the  modern  stage  that  every  revival  of  a 
Shakespearean  play  at  a  leading  theatre  must  exceed  in  magnificence 
all  that  went  before.  ,  .  .  The  natural  result  is  that  Shakespearean 
revivals  in  London  are  comparatively  rare;  they  take  place  at  un- 
certain intervals,  and  only  those  plays  are  viewed  with  favour  by  the 
managers  which  lend  themselves  in  their  opinion  to  ostentatious 
spectacle.  .  .  .  Until  Shakespeare  is  represented  constantly  and  in  his 
variety,  the  spiritual  and  intellectual  enlightenment  that  his  achieve- 
ment offers  to  Englishmen  wiU  remain  wholly  inaccessible  to  the 
majority  who  do  not  read  him,  and  wiU  be  only  in  part  at  the  com- 
mand of  the  few  who  do.  Nay  more :  until  Shakespeare  is  repre- 
sented on  the  stage  constantly  and  in  his  variety,  EngHshmen  are 
liable  to  the  imputation  not  merely  of  failing  in  the  homage  due  to 
the  greatest  of  their  countrymen,  but  of  falling  short  of  their  neigh- 
bours in  Germany  and  Austria  in  the  capacity  of  appreciating 
supremely  great  imaginative  literature. 

H.  Hamilton  Fyfe  :  "  A  Permanent  Shakespearean  Theatre." 
Fortnightly  Revicxv,  May  1900. 

.  .  .  We  have  gradually  come  to  think  that,  in  the  greatest  city 
in  the  world,  there  is  no  chance  at  all  for  artistic  enterprise.  Every 
time  we  visit  a  Continental  capital,  even  a  small  Continental  town,  we 
feel  a  prick  of  amazement  and  regret ;  but  the  practical  person  is 
generally  not  far  off,  and  we  have  to  be  content  with  his  pronounce- 
ment, in  a  hard  tone  of  absolute  finality,  that  "  this  sort  of  thing 
wouldn't  pay  in  London."  ...  As  to  the  desirability  of  "  organising 


lyo  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

the  theatre,"  I  take  that  to  be  admitted.  No  one  whose  opinion  has 
been  formed  by  knowledge  of  the  conditions  of  the  drama  has  even 
contended  that  long  runs,  costly  mounting  which  makes  long  runs 
necessary,  nervous  endeavour  to  meet  every  momentary  change  of 
mood  on  the  public's  part,  are  healthy  conditions.  Even  if  this  were 
not  so,  there  are  plenty  of  theatres  which  will  continue  on  the  present 
lines.     Can  we  not  try  at  least  one  theatre  of  the  other  kind  ? 

Brander  Matthews  :  "  The  Question  of  the  Theatre." 
North  American  Review,  March  1902. 

The  experience  of  history  seems  to  show  that  it  is  unwise  to  leave 
any  art  wholly  at  the  mercy  of  the  money-making  motives.  Even  in 
the  English-speaking  countries,  where  more  is  abandoned  to  private 
enterprise  than  is  thought  advisable  among  the  Latin  races,  galleries 
have  been  built  for  the  proper  exhibition  of  the  works  of  living 
painters  and  sculptors ;  and  concert-halls  have  been  erected  for  the 
proper  performance  of  orchestral  music.  In  New  York,  for  example, 
and  only  a  stone's-throw  from  each  other,  stand  the  Carnegie  Music 
Hall  and  the  Vanderbilt  Gallery  (of  the  Fine  Arts  Building),  visible 
evidences  of  the  aid  willingly  extended  by  the  wealthy  to  the  other 
arts.  In  Carnegie  Hall,  in  the  course  of  the  season,  concerts  are 
given  by  three  or  four  different  symphony-orchestras,  the  continued 
existence  of  which  is  conditional  upon  a  large  subscription  or  on  a 
guarantee  fund,  substantially  equivalent  to  a  subsidy.  And  during 
the  same  winter  months,  a  series  of  performances  of  grand  opera,  in 
Italian,  in  French,  and  in  German,  is  given  at  the  Metropolitan  Opera 
House — performances  made  possible  only  by  a  very  large  subscription 
from  the  box-holders,  and  by  a  reduction  of  the  rental  from  the  figure 
which  the  owners  of  the  building  would  demand  if  they  sought 
simply  for  a  proper  return  on  the  money  invested. 

If  men  of  means  had  not  chosen  to  sink  their  money  in  the 
Metropolitan  Opera  House  and  in  Carnegie  Hall ;  if  Major  Higginson 
were  now  to  withdraw  his  support  from  the  Boston  Symphony 
Orchestra,  and  if  the  pubUc-spirited  music-lovers  of  Chicago  and 
Pittsburg  were  to  refuse  any  further  subsidy  to  the  orchestras  of 
which  they  are  justly  entitled  to  be  proud ;  if  music  were  to  be 
deprived  of  all  artificial  assistance  and  forces,  to  depend  for  existence 


THEORY   OF   ENDOWMENT  171 

solely  upon  the  working  of  purely  commercial  motives — then,  music 
would  be  exactly  in  the  same  position  in  which  the  drama  is  now. 

Much  has  been  done  for  music ;  just  as  much  has  been  done  in 
other  ways  for  painting,  for  sculpture,  and  for  architecture.  Nothing 
at  all  has  been  done  for  the  drama.  It  is  wholly  dependent  upon 
the  law  of  supply  and  demand,  and  so  long  as  this  is  the  case,  the 
manager  will  naturally  seek  to  produce  the  kind  of  play  likely  to 
please  the  most  people.  He  will  perform  it  continuously,  seven  or 
eight  times  a  week,  for  as  many  weeks  as  possible.  He  will  proclaim 
its  merits  as  vehemently  as  he  can ;  and  he  will  advertise  it  very 
much  as  a  circus  or  a  sensational  novel  is  advertised. 

The  manager  has  to  present  the  kind  of  play  which  is  calculated 
to  please  the  largest  number  of  possible  spectators,  and  he  will  be 
likely  to  shrink  from  the  kind  of  play  which  would  appeal  to  a  small 
public  only,  which  cannot  be  forced  into  a  long  run,  and  which  does 
not  lend  itself  to  circus-methods  of  booming.  In  fact,  the  conditions 
of  the  theatre  being  what  they  are  now  in  New  York  and  in  London, 
the  wonder  is  that  the  level  of  the  stage  is  not  lower  than  it  is  actually, 
and  that  the  more  intelligent  playgoers  ever  have  an  opportunity  to 
see  anything  other  than  spectacle  and  sensation.  That  we  have  a 
chance  now  and  then  to  behold  more  plays  of  a  more  delicate  work- 
manship and  of  a  more  poetic  purpose,  is  due  partly  to  the  courage 
and  the  liberality  of  certain  of  the  managers,  and  partly  to  the 
honourable  ambition  of  certain  of  the  actors  and  actresses,  seeking 
occasion  for  the  exercise  of  their  art  in  a  wider  range  of  characters. 


'o^ 


Thus  the  drama  is  at  a  grave  disadvantage  as  compared  with  the 
other  arts,  owing  to  the  absence  of  all  outside  aid.  There  are  public 
libraries  for  the  preservation  of  the  masterpieces  of  literature,  and 
there  are  public  galleries  and  public  museums  for  the  proper  display 
of  the  masterpieces  of  painting  and  of  sculpture.  There  is  no  public 
theatre  where  the  masterpieces  of  the  drama  are  presented  for  our 
study  and  for  our  stimulation.  It  is  true  that  we  can  read  the  great 
plays  of  the  great  dramatists ;  we  can  read  them  by  ourselves  at  our 
own  firesides ;  but  how  pale  is  a  perusal  compared  with  a  performance, 
how  inadequate,  how  unsatisfactory !     Perhaps  a  mere  reading  may 


172  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

enable  us  to  appreciate  some  of  the  purely  literary  beauties  of  tlie 
play ;  but  it  will  hardly  help  us  to  apprehend  its  essential  dramatic 
qualities — the  very  qualities  which  give  the  play  its  true  value,  and 
which  stand  revealed  at  once  when  the  play  is  presented  in  the 
theatre. 


William  Archer  :  "  The  Case  for  National  Theatres." 
Monthly  Review,  July  1902. 

.  .  .  We  contend  for  a  principle  and  a  system :  the  principle  that 
the  acted  drama  of  the  English  language  ought  to  rank  high  among 
the  intellectual  glories,  and  among  the  instruments  of  culture,  of  the 
nation,  or  rather  of  the  race ;  the  system  of  securing  this  end  by 
giving  public  (not  necessarily  official)  recognition  and  support  to 
theatrical  art. 

Is  there  any  reader  who  cavils  at  the  principle  I  have  laid  down  ? 
If  so,  let  me  beg  him  to  consider  the  facts.  In  every  city  of  the 
United  Kingdom,  of  America,  of  Australasia,  there  are  from  one  to 
thirty  or  forty  theatres,  open  seven  or  eight  times  a  week,  and  many 
of  them  crowded  night  after  night  with  audiences  hungry  and  thirsty 
for  the  enjoyment,  the  stimulation,  afforded  by  what  is  beyond  all 
doubt  the  most  fascinating  and  popularly  attractive  of  the  arts. 
Many  people,  of  whom  I  speak  with  all  respect,  "  disapprove  "  of  the 
theatre  altogether — not,  as  matters  stand,  without  some  reason. 
But  their  disapproval  is  absolutely  impotent.  To  disapprove  of 
the  theatre  is  simply  to  disapprove  of  one  of  the  most  universal  and 
ineradicable  of  human  instincts,  which  leads  men  to  take  pleasure 
in  the  mimetic  reproduction,  idealisation,  or  caricature  of  their  own 
characters,  manners,  and  passions.  Year  by  year  theatres  multiply. 
There  is  very  good  reason  to  believe  that  not  only  the  absolute 
number  of  those  who  frequent  them,  but  the  relative  number  in 
proportion  to  the  whole  population,  is  steadily  increasing.  Can  it 
be  doubted  that,  for  good  or  evil — or  rather  for  good  and  evil — they 
exercise  an  enormous  influence  ?  Can  it  be  doubted  that  their  in- 
fluence for  good,  as  places  of  intellectual  recreation,  stimulation,  and 
invigoration,  might  easily  be  far  greater  than  it  is  ?  And  is  not  this 
end  worth  taking  some  trouble  to  attain.  ...  If  there  were  but 
one   playhouse   in  each  of  the  great  cities  of  the  English-speaking 


THEORY   OF    ENDOWMENT  173 

world  where  the  poetry  and  humour  of  the  past,  the  thought  and 
aspiration  of  the  present,  were  enabled  to  attract  to  them  the  better 
elements  in  the  public — now  scattered  and  unorganised  for  want  of 
any  artistic  rallying-point — can  it  be  doubted  that  the  theatre  would 
be,  what  I  have  said  it  ought  to  be — a  potent  instrument  of  culture, 
and  one  of  the  intellectual  glories  of  the  race  ? 

But  I  must  guard  against  the  ambiguity  which  lurks  in  the 
expression  "  the  theatre."  Used  in  this  sense  it  does  not,  of  course, 
include  all  theatres,  any  more  than  the  word  "  literature  "  includes  all 
books.  The  most  admirable  system  of  National  Theatres  would  not 
supplant  or  abolish  the  ordinary  commercial  playhouses.  National 
Theatres  would  help  the  better  order  of  commercial  theatres  by 
training  actors  for  them,  and  by  augmenting  the  numbers  of  the 
intelligent  public ;  but  the  lower  class  of  playhouses  they  would  leave 
practically  untouched,  or,  at  any  rate,  would  atfect  no  more  than 
would  any  other  institution  tending  to  raise  the  general  level  of 
intelligence.  The  dramatic  amusements  of  a  people,  taken  as  a 
whole,  will  always  answer  to  their  lower  as  well  as  to  their  higher 
instincts ;  just  as  the  noblest  efforts  in  poetry,  philosophy,  and  fiction 
do  not  prevent  the  bookstalls  from  being  crowded  with  trash.  The 
defect  of  the  English  theatre — as  distinguished  from  English  litera- 
ture and  from  the  theatres  of  other  great  nations — is  that  while  it 
ministers  amply  to  the  lower  instincts  of  the  race,  it  answers  very 
imperfectly  to  the  higher  instincts.  It  is  this  quite  needless 
inequality  that  the  supporters  of  the  National  Theatre  idea  aim  at 
correcting. 

In  considering  the  merits  of  any  system,  one  naturally  looks  for 
concrete  examples  of  it  in  operation.  And  here  let  me  point  to  a 
significant  fact.  The  great  nations  of  Western  Europe  are  five : 
France,  Germany  (which,  for  literary  purposes,  includes  German- 
speaking  Austria),  Italy,  Spain,  and  England.  In  two  of  these 
countries  the  theatre — as  a  home  both  of  the  national  classics  and 
of  the  drama  of  modern  life — ranks  high  among  the  intellectual 
glories  of  the  people.  In  three  the  theatre  is  rather  a  national 
reproach  than  a  national  glory,  though  two  of  these  nations  have  in 
bygone  centuries  produced  dramatic  literatures  of  marvellous  wealth 
and  splendour.     The  two  countries  in  which  the  theatre  nobly  fulfils 


174  NATIONAL  THEATRE 

its  functions  are  France  and  Germany ;  the  three  countries  in  which 
it  leaves  its  highest  functions  almost  wholly  unfulfilled  are  Italy, 
Spain,  and  England.  Now,  it  cannot  but  seem,  to  say  the  least  of 
it,  a  curious  coincidence  that  France  and  Germany  should  be  the 
countries  in  which  the  drama  receives,  and  has  for  long  received, 
all  sorts  of  public  recognition  and  support,  while  Italy,  Spain,  and 
England  are  the  countries  in  which  it  has  been  left  entirely  in  the 
hands  of  individual  speculators.  Is  it  altogether  rash  to  divine  some 
relation  of  cause  and  effect  between  these  phenomena  ?  Can  it  be  a 
pure  coincidence  that,  throughout  Western  Europe,  wherever  the  drama 
is  regarded  as  a  matter  of  pubUc  concern — national  or  local — it 
flourishes :  wherever  it  is  given  over  entirely  to  private  enterprise, 
it  more  or  less  obviously  falls  short  of  the  requirements  of  even  the 
most  modest  ideal  ? 

People  try  to  get  round  this  argument  in  several  ingenious  ways. 
Some  contend  that  the  superiority  of  the  theatrical  organisation  of 
France  and  Germany  is  illusory,  pointing  to  the  attacks  that  are 
frequently  made  by  French  and  German  critics  upon  the  Th(5atre- 
Franqais  and  the  German  Court  Theatres.  This  argument  we  may  at 
once  put  aside.  No  human  institution  is  flawless  and  unassailable. 
The  criticisms  which  are  levelled  against  the  French  and  German 
theatres  are,  many  of  them,  just  enough ;  but  they  involve  the 
application  of  an  incomparably  higher  standard  than  can  be  possibly 
applied  to  the  English  stage.  If  the  English  theatre  escapes  such 
criticisms,  it  is  only  by  not  rising  into  the  region  where  they  come 
into  force.  Wherever  it  does  rise  into  that  region,  it  is  open  to  ten 
times  severer  criticism  than  any  competent  and  candid  critic  can 
urge  against  the  leading  French  and  German  theatres.  To  argue 
that  we  should  be  content  with  the  English  theatre  as  it  is,  because 
French  critics  are  sometimes  discontented  with  the  Th^atre-Francais, 
is  simply  to  argue  against  all  progress  on  the  ground  that  absolute 
perfection  is  unattainable. 

More  plausible,  at  first  sight,  is  another  argument  not  infrequently 
advanced.  "  We  English  have  no  theatrical  endowments,"  it  is  said, 
"  because  we  are  not  a  theatrical  race.  The  excellence  of  the  French 
and  German  theatres  is  not  due  to  their  endowments ;  on  the  con- 
trary, the  existence  of  these  endowments  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the 
French  and  the  Germans  are  people  of  inborn  theatrical  proclivities, 


THEORY   OF    ENDOWMENT         175 

who,  taking  a  profound  national  interest  in  the  theatre,  are  naturally 
willing  to  give  it  national  support.  No  endowment  will  instil  into  a 
race  a  non-existent  theatrical  instinct."  There  is  a  certain  spacious- 
ness in  this  position,  until  we  look  into  the  facts,  which  are  as 
follows :  This  wholly  non-theatrical  race  has  produced  the  greatest 
dramatist  of  modern  times,  and  one  of  the  richest  of  dramatic 
literatures;  for  a  century  and  a  half  (1660  to  18 10,  or  thereabouts) 
its  theatre  rivalled  the  French  theatre  in  excellence ;  it  produced  one 
actor  (Garrick)  who  was  acknowledged  by  all  Europe  to  be  the  most 
universal  genius  in  his  art  that  the  world  had  seen,  and  countless 
actors  and  actresses  of  unquestionable  greatness ;  it  not  only  possessed 
a  rich  and  vigorous  theatrical  life  for  nearly  two  centuries  before  the 
Germans  had  anything  worthy  of  the  name,  but  it  at  two  different 
periods  fecundated  the  German  drama,  feebly  in  the  early  seventeenth 
century,  potently  and  decisively  in  the  latter  half  of  the  eighteenth : 
even  so  lately  as  1827  it  gave  the  final  impulse  to  the  romantic 
movement  in  France;  and  at  this  moment  it  manifests  a  passion  for 
the  theatre  not  inferior  in  strength  to  that  of  the  French  or  German 
public,  however  inferior  in  intelligence  and  enlightenment.  The 
truth  is  that  this  idea  of  an  inherent  disability  for  theatrical  art  in 
the  Anglo-Saxon  race  is  a  superstition  of  very  recent  origin,  begotten 
of  the  deep  depression  which  overtook  the  theatrical  life  of  the 
country  in  the  middle  years  of  the  nineteenth  century.  It  followed 
on  the  breakdown  of  the  monopoly  system  which  had  since  the 
Restoration  (however  imperfectly)  performed  the  function  which,  in 
France  and  Germany,  is  now  performed  by  endowments.  We  have 
in  the  past  century  fallen  behind  France  and  Germany  in  theatrical 
art,  not  because  of  any  innate  incapacity,  but  because,  at  a  critical 
moment,  we  omitted  to  take  any  reasonable  measures  to  keep  abreast 
of  them. 

It  may  be  asked  why  "  commercialism "  should  require  to  be 
"  mitigated  "  by  endowment  in  the  case  of  the  drama,  and  not  in  that 
of  literature.  The  answer  is  very  simple.  It  lies  in  the  enormously 
greater  capital  required  for  the  production  of  a  play  than  for  the  pro- 
duction of  a  book.  If  the  conditions  of  the  publishing  trade  were  such 
that  no  publisher  would  issue  a  new  book,  or  new  edition  of  an  old 
book,  that  did  not  seem  likely  to  find  at  least  50,000  purchasers  in 


176  NATIONAL   THEATRE 

the  course  of  three  months  from  the  date  of  pubHcation,  -we  should 
certainly  have  either  to  endow  literature  or  to  see  it  shrink  into  nothing 
but  shop-girl  romance  and  vulgar  chromo-illustrated  editions  of  some 
half-dozen  popular  classics.^  As  a  matter  of  fact,  books  can  be  so 
cheaply  produced,  and  the  book-market  is  so  wide,  that  no  work  of  the 
slightest  merit  fails  in  the  long  run  to  find  a  publisher,  and  the  highest 
forms  of  literary  art,  old  and  new,  freely  co-exist  with  the  lowest  and 
vulgarest,  each  form  seeking  out  its  elective  affinities.  Not  so  in  the 
commercial  theatre.  There  no  play  is  ever  produced  (except  by  mis- 
take) which  does  not  seem  likely  to  find,  at  the  very  least,  its  50,000 
spectators  in  the  course  of  three  months.  A  play  is  allowed  no  time 
to  seek  out  its  elective  affinities.  If  it  does  not  "  catch  on "  in  the 
course  of  two  or  three  weeks,  its  fate  is  sealed.  It  cannot,  like  a  novel, 
bide  its  time,  for  its  continued  existence  means  continued  outlay. 
Quite  apart  from  the  great  initial  expense  of  mounting,  the  sum  which 
it  costs  a  West-End  manager  to  "  take  his  curtain  up  "  every  evening 
is  about  equal  to  the  whole  cost  of  production  of  an  ordinary  novel. 
If,  in  order  to  place  a  novel  by  Mr.  Meredith  or  Mr.  Hardy  before  the 
world,  a  publisher  had  to  incur  an  initial  outlay  of  from  ^lOOO  to 
;^3000,  and  then  to  publish,  so  to  speak,  a  fresh  edition  every  day  at 
the  cost  of  ^i  20  or  so,  how  many  novels  of  Mr.  Meredith  or  Mr.  Hardy 
would  ever  have  seen  the  light  ?  Their  works,  indeed,  would  never 
have  been  written.  They  would  have  despaired  from  the  outset  of  the 
hopeless  task  of  reaching  the  public  under  such  conditions. 

William  Archer  :  "  What  can  be  done  for  the  Drama  ? " 
Anglo-Saxon  Review,  March  1900. 

.  .  .  That  there  are  difficulties  to  be  overcome  in  the  starting  of 
such  an  enterprise  I  have  freely  admitted.  But  the  main  difficulty 
lies,  not  in  any  external  conditions,  but  in  the  national  character,  with 
its  instinctive  shrinking  from  anything  that  savours  of  idealism.  .  .  . 
The  imagination  of  the  average  man — even  of  the  average  literary  man 
— is  very  slow  to  take  fire.     His  instinct  is  to  suggest  and  exaggerate 

^  It  is  needless  to  enter  here  upon  the  reasons  why  the  stage  has  not  absolutely  sunk 
into  this  condition.  It  is  the  condition  towards  which,  under  the  long-run  system,  it  neces- 
sarily tends  ;  though  the  tendency  may,  at  certain  points,  be  intermittently  and  imperfectly 
coanteiacted. 


THEORY   OF   ENDOWMENT  177 

difficulties,  instead  of  resolving  to  overcome  them.  He  cannot  see 
that  the  only  insuperable  difficulty — if,  indeed,  it  be  insuperable — 
lies  in  his  own  infirmity  of  purpose.  Most  of  the  practical  objections 
he  urges  are  met  in  advance  by  the  experience  of  other  nations.  It 
is  alleged,  for  example,  that  an  endowed  theatre  would  necessarily  be 
a  hotbed  for  backstairs  intrigue,  favouritism,  and  jobbery.  Human 
nature  being  as  yet  imperfect,  it  is  probable  enough  that  ideal  justice 
might  not  always  hold  sway  in  the  counsels  of  the  enterprise.  But 
there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  an  English  theatre  would  be  more 
dishonestly  managed  than  a  French  or  German  theatre  ;  and  it  is  found 
in  France  and  Germany  that,  whatever  the  imperfections  in  their  work- 
ings, endowed  theatres  are  on  the  whole  advantageous,  nay,  indispens- 
able, to  sound  theatrical  art.  The  checks  upon  favouritism  in  a  public 
institution  are  certainly  greater  than  in  a  private  enterprise.  But  even 
if  that  were  not  so,  how  foolish  the  inertia  which  says,  "  Because  we 
cannot  devise  an  ideal  instrument  for  a  great  end,  we  will  have  no 
instrument  at  all,  and  leave  the  end  unattempted  ! "  Other  objectors 
point  to  the  comparative  poverty  of  the  contemporary  drama,  and  say, 
"  Why  trouble  about  a  theatre  until  you  have  the  plays  to  act  in  it  ? " 
In  other  words,  they  make  the  very  state  of  things  that  calls  for  remedy 
an  argument  for  not  remedying  it.  The  contemporary  drama  is  not 
what  it  ought  to  be,  granted.  If  it  were,  there  would  be  the  less  need 
for  a  Repertory  Theatre,  though  it  would  still  be  extremely  desirable 
for  the  due  cultivation  of  the  classical  drama.  But  the  contemporary 
drama,  with  all  its  shortcomings,  is  sufficiently  vital  to  chafe  at  the 
restrictions  imposed  on  it  by  the  present  system  of  commercial  manage- 
ment. Surely,  then,  it  is  the  height  of  inconsequence  to  make  the 
depressing  effect  of  these  restrictions  a  reason  for  not  attempting  to 
remove  them. 


M 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


JAN  3     1955 
JAN  1  8  1355 

WAR  2  1  1957 


'■»<  -^ 


gBBfEWAL  JAN 


m-^  ¥• 


liti^^ 


.tistti 


141963 


QftA 


Form  L9-25m-9,'47(A5618)444 


THE  LIBRARY 

OWVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
LOS  AN^BLES 


Hf.,^?."I"E'"'  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

""""""" IIIIIIIIU  lllllllllll 


D    000  840  785    o 


I 


PLEA«^  DO  NOT  REMOVE 
THIS  BOOK  CARD  1 


s^tL:eRARY6k 


University  Research  Library 


z 
w 


to 


..•/- 


,«> 


€> 


